Skip to main content

Full text of "The Presbyterian Quarterly and Princeton Review"

See other formats


kA'?  <Ty  y 


0t  ft*  Slworogirai  j 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


Presented 


by  mns.  (5V<so.  lOorcroas  . 


Division 


R 

A-l.'i't 
A l A 
>M1 


Section 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/presbyterianqua6221atwa_0 


THE 


PRESBYTERIAN  QUARTERLY 

AND 

PRINCETON  REVIEW. 

t 

NEW  SERIES,  No.  22.— JULY,  1877. 


Art.  1.  — THE  HIGHER  LIFE  AND  CHRISTIAN  PERFECTION.* 

By  Lyman  H.  Atwater. 

That  the  prevalent  tone  cf  Christian  experience  and  holy- 
living  is  quite  below  the  level  of  scriptural  standards  and  privi- 
leges ; that  there  is  an  urgent  call  for  the  great  body  of  Chris- 
tians to  rise  to  a much  higher  plane  of  inward  piety  and  its 

visiblefruits ; that  none  are  so  high  that  they  should  not  make 
it  their  supreme  endeavor  to  rise  higher  ; that  to  struggle  on- 
ward and  upward  through  the  strength,  holiness  and  grace  al- 
ready attained  to  yet  higher  measures  of  them,  so  that  receiv- 
ing grace  for  grace,  they  may  go  from  strength  to  strength 
toward  the  goal  of  sinless  perfection  whenever  and  wheresoever 
attainable  ; that  so  there  is  required  the  ceaseless  effort  to  get 
free  from  sin  and  overcome  indwelling  corruption,  are  proposi- 
tions which  few  will  be  found  to  dispute,  unless,  indeed,  some 
Perfectionists  dispute  the  last  of  them,  claiming  to  have  reached 

* The  Higher  Christian  Life , by  Rev.  W.  E.  Boardman. 

Pioneer  Experiences ; or,  the  Gift  of  Posner  Received  by  Faith.  Illustrated  and 
Confirmed  by  the  Testimony  of  Eighty  Living  Witnesses  of  Various  Detiominations. 
By  the  author  of  “ Way  of  Holiness,”  &c.  Introduction  by  Rev.  Bishop  Janes. 

The  Rest  of  Faith , by  Rev.  Isaac  M.  See. 

Autobiography  of  Rev.  Charles  G.  Finney.  Chapter  xxvii. 

Holiness  the  Birthright  of  God's  Children , by  the  Rev.  J.  T.  Crane,  D.  D. 

The  Old  Paths  ; a Treatise  on  Sanctification.  Scripture  the  Only  Authority.  By 
Rev.  Thomas  Mitchell. 

Purity  and  Maturity,  by  Rev.  J.  A.  W ood. 

A Plain  Account  of  Christian  Perfection,  by  Rev.  John  Wesley. 

(New  Series,  No.  22.)  25 


The  Higher  Life 


390 


[July, 


entire  sinlessness  in  this  life.  They  are  to  the  eye  of  true 
Christian  insight  their  own  evidence. 

To  emphasize  and  magnify  the  “ Higher  Life’’  in  this  sense 
is  simply  to  recognize  and  strive  to  give  effect  to  the  princi- 
ples of  our  common  Christianity  ; and  in  this  all  will  or  ought 
heartily  to  join.  It  is  worth  while  to  mark  this  distinctly  at 
the  outset.  For  this  term  “higher  life”  is  constantly  used 
now  to  denote  something  quite  different,  as  if  it  were  the 
peculiarity  of  a small  select  circle  who  make  it  their  watchword, 
a badge  of  the  chosen  few  who  have  reached  summits  of  Chris- 
tian experience  quite  above  the  great  mass  of  the  common- 
wealth of  Israel.  Theirs  are  the  gifts  and  endowments  to 
which  Christians  generally  are  strangers,  and  theirs  the  joys 
with  which  a stranger  intermeddleth  not.  The  distinctive 
views  of  the  class  we  refer  to,  amid  many  minor  and  circum- 
stantial variations,  are  for  substance  : 

1.  That  sinless  perfection  is  attainable,  and  by  those  who 
attain  the  higher  life  in  question,  actually  attained  in  this 
life. 

2.  That  it  is  gained  instantaneously  by  an  act  of  faith  in 
Christ,  which  appropriates  him  for  immediate  and  entire  sanc- 
tification, in  the  same  manner  as  for  immediate  and  full  jus- 
tification ; and  that  each  is  equally,  with  the  other,  immediate, 
equally  complete,  equally  conferred  co-instantaneously  with 
the  act  of  faith  which  receives  it ; and  in  equal  independence 
of  works,  as  in  any  sense  either  the  procuring,  instrumental, 
efficient  or  meritorious  cause. 

3.  Therefore,  that  this  perfect  sanctification  is  not  through 
any  process  of  gradual  growth,  striving,  or  advancement  to- 
ward sinless  perfection,  whether  in  this  life  or  the  life  to 
come;  but  is  at  once  grasped  by  faith,  and  held  by  it  till  let  go 
by  backsliding  or  apostasy — the  latter  being  regarded  by  the 
Higher  Life  Arminians  as  liable,  by  those  that  are  Calvinists 
as  not  liable,  to  occur. 

4.  This  attainment  is  attended  with  the  constant  or  ordi- 
nary presence  of  unclouded  peace,  joy  and  hope,  such  as  the 
Bible  connects  with  the  highest  grades  of  Christian  experi- 
ence. 

5.  Some,  perhaps  most,  of  this  Higher  Life  school,  so  far  es- 
pecially as  it  has  appeared  in  Calvinistic  communions,  maintain 


i8 77.]  and  Christian  Perfection.  391 

that  this  act  of  faith  which  instantaneously  grasps  perfect  sanc- 
tity is  preceded  by  an  act  of  entire  consecration  to  God  in 
Christ.  In  other  words,  it  is  preceded  by  itself — for  entire 
consecration  is  perfect  holiness. 

In  regard  to  all  these  points  we  think  the  position  taken  in 
our  standards  scriptural  and  impregnable,  and  that  no  more 
correct  and  adequate  enunciation  of  Christian  truth  in  the 
premises  can  be  found.* 

We  may  remark,  before  going  further,  that  with  some  the 
doctrine  of  Higher  Life  means  merely  the  habitual  possession 
and  enjoyment  of  Christian  assurance,  in  which  they  erro- 
neously conceive  themselves  exceptional  or  superior  to  any 
recognized  standards  of  Christian  experience  in  evangelical 
churches.  This,  however,  as  our  standards  affirm,  belongs  to 
the  normal  development  of  Christian  experience ; not,  how- 
ever, so  that  it  usually  becomes  firm  and  enduring,  even  if  it 
appear  at  all,  in  the  early  stages  of  the  regenerate  life.  It 
rather  belongs  normally,  though  not  exclusively,  to  the  ma- 
turer  stages  of  Christian  experience;  it  is  confirmed  by  the 
culture  and  consequent  evidence  of  the  graces,  which  are  also 
the  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  and  evidences  of  his  saving  work. 
These,  however,  are  so  wrought  in  us  by  the  Spirit  as  to  de- 
pend at  the  same  time  upon  our  “ giving  all  diligence  unto  the 
full  assurance  of  hope  unto  the  end”;  all  “diligence  to  make  our 
calling  and  election  sure,”  the  Holy  Spirit  herein  and  hereby 
witnessing  with  our  spirits  that  we  are  the  children  of  God. 

It  is  too  true  that  far  fewer  attain  this  blessed  estate  than 
might  be  looked  for  in  a normal  condition  of  the  church;  far 
fewer  than  those  to  whom  the  privileges  of  the  gospel  estate 
and  Christian  vocation  open  it,  who  might  and  should  work 
up  to  and  reach  it.  It  is  no  less  true  that  those  who  attain  a 
sound  assurance  sustained  by  good  Christian  fruits,  reach  a 
higher  than  average  Christian  life,  and  generally  higher  than 
their  own  previous  Christian  life.  In  this  sense  a higher  life 
than  the  average  among  Christians  may  be  maintained.  But 
this  is  not,  or  is  only  in  part,  the  kind  of  higher  life  intended. 
This  latter  involves  not  only  assurance,  which  rests  on  perfect 
justification  duly  proving  itself  by  holiness  of  life,  but  perfect 

*See  Larger  Catechism , answers  to  questions  77  8-9-80.  Shorter  Catechism , 
questions  35-82. 


392 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


sanctification  ; and  this  sanctification  received  by  some  single 
act  of  faith  as  an  accomplished  fact,  which  keeps  the  soul  in  a 
continuous  state  of  freedom  from  sin,  and  from  all  conscience 
of  sin,  and  so  of  abiding  peace  and  joy,  by  a sort  of  quietistic 
resting  in  Christ,  not  only  for  justification,  but  for  sanctifica- 
tion. This  peace  and  assurance,  too,  come  not  mainly  from 
the  sense  of  pardon  through  Christ’s  imputed  righteousness, 
but  of  sinlessness  through  the  perfect  inherent  righteousness 
or  holiness  wrought  by  him  within  us,  and  received  by  us,  like 
his  justifying  righteousness,  by  faith,  without  personal  works 
or  strivings  on  our  part  to  effect  or  to  promote  it. 

As  we  shall  see  more  fully  further  on,  this  perfectionism  is 
defined  and  vindicated  in  different  and  often  inconsistent  ways 
by  its  advocates.  It  is  apt  to  run  into  some  form  of  Quietism 
or  Mysticism,  or  Antinomianism,  or  licentiousness,  while  a 
large  proportion  of  those  embracing  some  forms  of  it  give 
every  sign  of  leading  holy  lives. 

The  Reformed  and  Calvinistic  doctrine,  as  expressed  in  our 
standards,  and  as  held  by  nearly  all  evangelical  Protestants, 
the  Methodists  and  Lutherans  excepted,  differs  from  the  fore- 
going by  asserting  that  sin,  although  subdued  and  growing 
weaker,  is  never  entirely  eradicated  in  this  life  ; while  the  re- 
newed spirit,  ever  struggling  against  it,  is,  notwithstanding 
possible  occasional  vicissitudes  and  backslidings,  on  the  whole 
gaining  the  mastery  over  it,  till  the  grand  consummation  of 
complete  deliverance  from  sin  is  reached  at  death,  which  itself 
with  sin — its  cause — there  dies.  Hence  it  maintains  that  sanc- 
tification is  a gradual  work,  growing  with  the  growth,  and  pro- 
moted by  the  efforts,  struggles  and  prayers  of  the  Christian  ; 
who,  while  in  his  predominating  character  holy,  is  yet  never 
free  in  this  life  from  the  remains  of  sin,  which,  though  ever  dy- 
ing, is  not  dead,  but  still  maintains  its  dying  struggle,  till  the 
soul,  freed  at  death,  passes  to  be  one  of  the  spirits  of  the  just 
made  perfect. 

In  further  clearing  the  issue  before  us,  it  is  expedient  to  dis- 
pose of  a number  of  inconclusive  arguments,  often  and  confi- 
dently advanced  by  the  advocates  of  the  theory  in  question. 

i.  Those  passages  of  Scripture  which  attribute  sanctifica- 
tion, holiness,  or  purity  to  believers,  or  which  exhort  them  to 
seek,  pursue  or  practise  the  same,  or  which  promise  deliver- 


1877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


393 


ance  from  sin  in  its  guilt,  pollution  and  dominion,  or  which 
covenant  full  and  complete  salvation — all  these  prove  nothing 
in  behalf  of  sinless  perfection  in  this  life.  They  prove  nothing 
because  they  are  applied  to  all  Christians  and  saints  as  such  in 
the  Scripture,  and  not  merely  to  a few  select  ones  of  a higher 
grade  of  Christian  life  than  the  mass.  But  it  is  admitted  by  this 
school  that  the  mass  of  Christians  have  not  yet  attained,  and  in 
this  life  most  of  them  never  will  attain,  sinless  perfection.  There- 
fore, if  they  are  actually  addressed  to  those  who  are  Christians, 
but  yet  not  sinlessly  perfect,  then  this  demonstrates  that  they 
give  no  evidence  of  the  perfect  sinlessness  of  those  to  whom 
they  are  addressed,  or  for  whom  they  are  designed. 

Not  only  so,  but  the  Christian  to  whom  all  pretensions  of 
sinless  perfection  are  alien  and  offensive,  interprets  these  pas- 
sages as  applicable  to  himself  and  suiting  his  own  case,  with- 
out the  least  consciousness  or  suspicion  of  distorting,  pervert- 
ing, or  overstraining  their  proper  import.  Full  salvation  is  in- 
deed promised  and  secured  to  all  the  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus. 
But  it  is  only  in  part  or  in  its  beginnings  here ; in  its  seed  first 
•implanted  and  quickened  in  regeneration,  herein  having  the 
pledge  of  onward  growth  in  holiness,  and  increasing  Christian 
fruitage  upon  earth.  The  soul  is  to  be  made  perfect  therein 
at  death  ; then  immediately  passing  into  glory  to  await  re- 
union with  the  body  at  the  resurrection  of  the  just,  when 
Christ  shall  raise  it  again,  and  make  it  like  unto  his  glorious 
body.  So  we  receive  a full  salvation  in  Christ  when  we  receive 
him  by  faith  ; but  a salvation  begun  here,  and  completed  only 
with  respect  to  the  soul  when  we  pass  by  the  gate  of  death  to 
the  realms  of  glory ; and  with  respect  to  the  body  when  it 
shall  also  be  raised  in  glory.  All  these  things  are  included  in 
salvation,  a part  at  once  finished  and  perfect  upon  the  first  act 
of  faith,  as  justification  and  a title  to  the  heavenly  inheritance  ; 
a part  inchoate  and  germinant,  to  have  a future  development 
and  growth,  as  sanctification  and  Christian  maturity  and  fruit- 
fulness; or  part  in  promise  and  foretaste,  as  the  resurrection 
of  the  body  and  the  life  everlasting.  He  who  receives  Christ 
indeed,  receives  “ all  things  pertaining  to  life  and  godliness.” 
“ Whom  he  did  predestinate,  them  he  also  called  ; whom  he 
called,  them  he  also  justified  ; whom  he  justified,  them  he  also 
glorified.” — Rom.  viii.  30.  Is  not  glorification  here  declared 


394 


The  Higher  Life 


[July 


to  have  been  conferred  on  the  elect,  concurrently  with  justifi- 
cation, and  in  terms  as  completely  implying  what  is  already, 
in  some  sense,  as  really  done  or  effected  as  justification,  and  as 
surely  indicative  of  its  full  accomplishment,  as  are  ever  used 
with  reference  to  our  full  salvation,  or  any  part  of  it,  even 
personal  holiness  or  sanctification  itself?  But  no  one  not 
fanatically  blinded  will  pretend  that  heavenly  glory  is  our  por- 
tion in  this  life,  or  is  ours  on  earth  otherwise  than  in  the  per- 
fect title  to  it  secured  by  justification,  and  the  preparation  for 
it  begun  in  regeneration  and  conversion,  and  carried  forward 
in  our  progressive  sanctification. 

No  passage  of  Scripture  can  prove  sinless  perfection  in  this 
life,  which  is  indisputably  addressed  and  applied  to  those  who 
are  confessedly  imperfect  or  defiled  with  any-  remainder  of  sin. 
But  the  great  majority  of  professing  Christians,  whom  perfec- 
tionists allow  to  be  real  Christians  according  to  the  judgment 
of  charity  on  the  one  hand,  and  to  be  imperfect  in  holiness  on 
the  other,  are  addressed  or  referred  in  nearly  if  not  quite  all 
the  passages  habitually  quoted  as  proving  sinless  perfection 
in  this  life.  Thus,  the  passage  I John  iii : 9:  “Whosoever 
is  born  of  God  doth  not  commit  sin,  for  his  seed  remaineth  in 
him,  and  he  cannot  sin  because  he  is  born  of  God,”  and  other 
less  emphatic  declarations  in  the  context,  must  be  so  interpret- 
ed as  to  be  true,  whatever  else  they  may  signify,  of  all  Christian 
people — all  who  are  “born  of  God.”  But  confessedly  the 
most  of  these  come  short  of  the  sinless  perfection  claimed  for 
a few.  The  sense  in  which  such  cannot  sin,  because  the  seed 
of  grace  and  holiness  remaineth  in  them,  is  that  they  cannot 
sin  prevailingly,  persistently,  with  full  purpose,  allowance,  or 
without  resistance  and  repentance.  They  cannot  sin  in  such 
wise  that  “ sin  shall  have  dominion  over  them,”  or  that  holi- 
ness shall  not  be  the  ascendant,  and  increasingly  ascendant 
principle  within  them,  until  at  death  its  victory  over  sin  is  ab- 
solutely complete  and  exterminating.  It  is  all  solved  by  the 
nature  of  the  Christian  conflict  between  the  flesh  and  spirit,  so 
graphically  depicted,  Gal.  v : 17,  and  Rom.  vii  : 14-25,  which Y 
however  we  may  find  it  hard  to  harmonize  with  the  psychol- 
ogy or  metaphysics  any  may  have  engrafted  on  their  theology, 
finds  its  response  and  counterpart  in  normal  Christian  experi- 
ence. All  Christians  know  what  it  means  to  have  the  flesh 


1 877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


395 


lusting  against  the  spirit,  so  that  in  a sense  they  “ cannot  do 
the  things  they  would.”  While  they  “ delight  in  the  law  of 
God  after  the  inward  man,”  still  they  do  what  they  allow 
not,  and  yet,  amazing  paradox  ! in  a sense,  it  is  no  more  they 
“ that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  them,”  and  then,  whether 
we  can  explain  it  or  not,  it  is  the  man  himself  who  with  the 
mind  serves  the  law  of  God,  and  with  the  flesh  the  law  of  sin. 
It  is  the  same  Ego,  or  self,  that  is  tainted  with  the  sin,  against 
which  it  strives,  going  on  from  conquering  yet  to  conquer  it, 
and  at  last,  through  grace,  utterly  extinguishing  it. 

Another  climacteric  text  adduced  by  perfectionists  is  Eph. 
v : 25,  26,  27:  “ Husbands,  love  your  wives,  even  as  Christ  also 
loved  the  church,  and  gave  himself  for  it ; that  he  might 
cleanse  it  with  the  washing  of  water  by  the  Word  ; that  he 
might  present  to  himself  a glorious  church,  not  having  spot  or 
wrinkle  or  any  such  thing,  but  that  it  should  be  holy  and  with- 
out blemish.”  It  is  undeniable  that  this  applies  to  the  church 
of  the  saved  and  redeemed,  militant  and  triumphant ; to  all 
real  Christians,  as  representing  their  state  already  attained  or 
to  be  attained.  But  inasmuch  as  confessedly  in  the  militant 
state  the  great  body  of  Christians  are  not  yet  without  spot, 
wrinkle  or  blemish,  it  follows  that  this  passage  does  not  prove 
any  present  sinless  perfection  in  this  world,  but  only  in  the 
future  life. 

If  perfectionism  derives  no  support  from  texts  of  this  tenor, 
much  less  does  it  derive  any  from  passages  ascribing,  promising 
or  enjoining  holiness  or  sanctification  upon  the  people  of  God. 
Yet  passages  of  this  scope  and  tenor  are  constantly  and  freely 
quoted  in  behalf  of  sinless  perfection.  Its  advocates  speak  and 
argue  as  if  holiness  and  sanctification  belonged  to  them  alone, 
and  were  distinctive  of  them  in  contrast  to  the  whole  church 
besides  ; and  generally  as  if  it  became  theirs,  not  at  ftlieir  orig- 
inal, but  at  some  second  conversion.  This  notion  of  a second 
conversion,  which  introduces  to  the  “ higher  life  ” of  sinless 
purity,  is  maintained  expressly  by  such  writers  as  Boardman  in 
“ Higher  Christian  Life,”  and  in  substance  by  all  the  Higher 
Life  and  Perfectionist  school.  And  they  are  very  apt  to  rep- 
resent it  as  simply  an  entrance  upon,  or  attainment,  or  begin- 
ning, of  sanctification  or  holiness.  They  even  use  these  terms 
as  the  very  titles  of  their  books  and  treatises  in  advocacy  of 


396 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


the  attainableness  of  sinless  perfection.  Thus,  the  title  of  one 
of  the  best  of  these  books,  by  a leading  Methodist  divine,  Rev. 
J.  T.  Crane,  D.D.,  is  “ Holiness  the  Birthright  of  God’s  Chil- 
dren.” Rev.  J.  A.  Wood,  author  of  a work  on  “ Perfect  Love,” 
in  his  volume  on  “Purity  and  Maturity,”  says  : “ Purity  or  holi- 
ness, significant  of  quality,  implies  entirety.  It  does  not  mean  a 
mixture  of  purity  and  pollution,  partly  clean  and  partly  de- 
filed ” (p.  25).  Binney,  in  his  “ Theological  Compend  Im- 
proved,” under  the  head  entitled  “Holiness  — Sanctifica- 
tion,” says  : “ This  state  ...  is  called  holiness,  sanctification, 
purity,  perfection,  fulness  of  God  and  of  Christ  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  full  assurance  of  faith.  What  is  meant  by 
these  expressions  is  that  participation  of  the  divine  nature 
which  excludes  all  original  depravity  or  inbred  sin  from  the 
heart,  and  fills  it  with  perfect  love  to  God  and  man — perfect 
love,  the  unction  of  the  Holy  One,  and  the  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  ” (p.  128). 

According  to  this,  none  can  be  holy  or  sanctified  who  have 
any  remains  of  “ original  depravity  or  inbred  sin,”  or  less  than 
“ perfect  love  to  God  and  man.”  At  this  rate  all  Christians, 
all  who  have  experienced  the  new  birth,  must  be  in  this  elevat- 
ed state.  So  he  proceeds  to  tell  us,  “Holiness  begins  when 
the  principle  of  purity — namely,  love  to  God — is  shed  abroad  in 
the  heart  in  the  new  birth.”  And  yet  he  immediately  adds  : 
“But  entire  sanctification  is  that  act  of  the  Holy  Ghost  where- 
by the  justified  soul  is  made  holy.  This  instantaneous  work  of 
the  sanctifier  is  usually  preceded  and  followed  by  a gradual 
growth  in  grace.  The  Spirit  certifies  this  purification." — 1 Cor. 
11,  12.  Can  there  be  greater  confusion  and  self  contradiction 
than  this?  Holiness  and  sanctification  are  defined  to  be  “per- 
fect love  yet  holiness — i.e.,  perfect  love — begins  at  the  new 
birth  ; wtfile  “ entire  sanctification  ” comes  later  by  an  instanta- 
neous work  of  the  sanctifier,  “ usually  preceded  and  followed 
by  a gradual  growth  in  grace.”  How  does  “ perfect  love  ” differ 
from  “ entire  sanctification  ? ” And  what  room  remains  for 
growth  in  grace  beyond  “ entire  sanctification  ? ” This,  by  the 
way,  is  one  specimen  of  the  enormous  inconsistencies  into 
which  perfectionists  and  higher  life  advocates  run,  of  which  we 
shall  see  many  more  as  we  go  on. 

Among  all  the  adherents  of  this  doctrine  since  the  Quietists 


1877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


397 


and  Mystics  of  a former  age,  we  rarely  find  any  more  refined, 
cultured,  disciplined,  endowed  with  natural  and  acquired 
strength  of  mind,  delicacy  of  taste,  and  vigor  of  spiritual  graces, 
than  the  late  T.  C.  Upham,  Professor  of  Mental  Science  in 
Bowdoin  College,  and  author  of  popular  text-books  on  that 
subject,  as  well  as  of  publications  on  this  peculiar  type  of  what 
he  styled  the  “ Interior  Life.”  He,  if  any  who  catch  the  mag- 
netism of  the  converts  to  this  theory,  should  have  been  supe- 
rior, not  only  to  all  shams  and  impostures,  all  cant,  hypocrisy 
and  affectation,  but  to  all  loose  bandying  of  the  catch-words 
and  watchwords  which  form  the  shibboleths  of  sects,  parties 
and  self-exalting  coteries.  He  speaks  of  “ the  true  idea  of 
Christian  perfection  or  holiness”  as  if  such  perfection  were  the 
only  holiness,”  also  of  being  “ sanctified  unto  the  Lord,”  as 
being  identical  with  the  “ blessing  of  perfect  love  ” ( Pioneer 
Experiences , pp.  96,  97) ; also  of  coming  “ ultimately  to  the  un- 
doubting conclusion  that  God  required  me  to  be  holy,  that  he 
had  made  provision  for  it,  and  that  it  was  both  my  duty  and 
my  privilege  to  be  so.  The  establishment  of  my  belief  in  this 
great  doctrine  was  followed  by  a number  of  pleasing  and  im- 
portant results.” — Id.  p.  91.  It  could  not  be  otherwise — if,  in- 
deed, it  was  a discovery  for  the  first  time  that  God  requires 
and  makes  provision  for  holiness  in  his  people.  Of  course  the 
only  holiness  which  could  have  been  the  subject  of  such  dis- 
covery is  that  which  is  sinless.  Whence  it  appears  that  a large 
part  of  the  arguments  and  pretensions  of  this  school  fall  to  the 
ground,  unless  the  holiness  and  sanctification  of  the  Bible  al- 
ways mean  sinless  perfection ; and  hence,  that  all  true  Chris- 
tians are  sinless,  which  these  same  people  do  not  even  claim  to 
be  true  of  more  than  a small  part  of  them. 

Closely  connected  with  all  this  is  the  constant  confounding 
of  sanctification  with  justification  ; of  inherent  with  imputed 
or  forensic  righteousness;  of  the  cleansing  from  the  guilt,  or 
condemnation  to  the  punishment  of  sin,  with  the  cleansing 
from  its  power  and  pollution.  Justification  is  instantaneous 
and  complete  upon  the  first  act  of  faith  in  Christ  or  vital  union 
to  Him.  In  its  nature,  justification  is  entire,  or  not  at  all.  “He 
that  believeth  shall  no  more  come  into  condemnation,  but 
hath  passed  from  death  unto  life.”  There  is  indeed  “ no  more 
condemnation  to  those  that  are'  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not 


39^ 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit.”  Sanctification,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  begun  in  infantile  yet  prevailing  strength  at 
conversion,  and  advances  by  a gradual  and  progressive  growth, 
in  which  the  new-born  soul  goes  forward,  “having  these  prom- 
ises, to  cleanse  itself  from  all  filthiness  of  the  flesh  and  spirit, 
perfecting  holiness  in  the  fear  of  God  so  always  cleansing 
stains  which,  although  thus  growing  less,  yet  still  remain  in 
this  decreasing  form  to  be  contended  against  till  they  are 
wholly  expunged. 

Now,  how  often  is  this  declaration,  and  others  the  like,  that 
Jesus,  “ by  one  offering  hath  perfected  forever  them  that  are 
sanctified,”  quoted  in  favor  of  perfect  and  sinless  sanctification 
in  this  life?  Yet,  to  this  construction  it  is  a fatal  objection, 
that  it  applies  to  all  the  sanctified,  all  who  are  saved  through 
Christ’s  offering.  But  of  these  it  is  allowed  that  the  vast  ma- 
jority have  not  become  thus  sinless.  The  perfecting,  therefore, 
must  relate  to  that  which  is  at  once  made  perfect  by  the  offer- 
ing of  Christ,  viz.,  justification.  This  is  conceded  on  all  hands 
to  be  perfect  from  first  to  last,  whatever  may  or  may  not  be 
the  sense  of  it  in  the  believer’s  consciousness.  So  the  declar- 
ations, i John  i:  7-9,  “That  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  his  Son 
cleanseth  us  from  all  sin,”  and  that  “ if  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is 
faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from 
all  unrighteousness,”  obviously  refer  to  justification  as  the  im- 
mediate and  finished  result  of  the  application  of  this  blood, 
and  only  indirectly  to  sanctification  which  accompanies  justi- 
fication, at  first  initial  and  germinant,  but  gradually  carried 
forward  to  perfect  sinlessness  in  heaven  ; for  the  8th  verse  de- 
clares, to  the  utter  discomfiture  of  any  perfectionism  founded 
in  this  passage,  “ If  we  say  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive  our- 
selves, and  the  truth  is  not  in  us.”  So  all  promises  of  cleans- 
ing refer  to  that  washing  away  of  sins  in  the  blood  of  the 
Lamb  which  consists  in  perfect  justification,  or  to  progressive 
cleansing  of  the  pollution  of  sin  by  gradual  sanctification.  To 
this  latter  the  command  to  cleanse  ourselves  refers;  charging 
us  to  “ purify  ourselves  in  obeying  the  truth  through  the  Spirit,” 
not  as  a thing  yet  finished,  but  always  progressing  ; so  that  what- 
ever be  our  assurance  of  hope,  he  that  hath  this  hope  must  be 
ever  purifying  himself,  “ even  as  God  is  pure.”  One  source  of 
obscurity  and  confusion  on  this  subject,  therefore,  is  the  ten- 


1 877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


399 


dency  of  many  of  the  Higher  Life  persuasion  more  or  less  to 
confound  justification  with  sanctification. 

Perhaps  the  strongest  pleas  are  those  founded  on  the  Biblical 
use  of  the  words  “ perfect,”  “ blameless,”  or  their  equivalents,, 
in  reference  to  the  people  of  God.  But  that  these  words  are 
used  in  various  senses,  some  of  them  not  implying  absolute  sin- 
lessness, is  too  plain  to  admit  of  plausible  denial.  Even  the 
injunction  so  often  quoted  by  the  perfectionists,  that  “ having 
these  promises  we  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of  the 
flesh  and  spirit,  perfecting  holiness  in  the  fear  of  God,”  implies 
that  this  process  of  perfecting  is  to  go  on,  and  is  therefore  not 
yet  finished.  It  implies  that  the  normal  Christian  life  here 
consists  in  having  the  ideal  of  perfect  holiness  before  the  eye 
of  faith,  and  constantly  working  toward  it,  ever  approaching* 
but  not  reaching  it  this  side  of  heaven.  And  this  is  the  only 
way  in  which  we  can  consistently  interpret  Phil,  iii  : 12,  15,  in 
the  former  of  which  the  Apostle  explicitly  says:  “Not  as 
though  I had  already  attained,  or  were  already  perfect ; but  I 
follow  after,  if  that  I may  apprehend  that  for  which  I am  appre- 
hended of  Christ  Jesus;”  while  in  the  latter,  his  words  are: 
“ Let  us,  therefore,  as  many  as  be  perfect,  be  thus  minded.” 
Here  it  is  clear  that  “perfect  ” means  truly  apprehending  and 
struggling  toward  the  standard  of  perfection  in  holiness,  which* 
in  the  former,  he  represents  himself  as  not  having  yet  attained. 
Not  different  is  the  meaning  of  the  word,  Eph.  iv  : 12,  where 
he  represents  the  ministry  as  given  inter  alia  “ for  the  perfect- 
ing of  the  saints.”  What  else  does  this  mean  but  that  they 
are  instruments  employed  to  constantly  advance  the  saints  to- 
ward that  holiness  which  befits  the  atmosphere  of  heaven  ? 

Perfection  is  also  applied  to  Christian  character  to  denote, 
not  sinlessness,  but  the  elements  and  constituent  parts  of  Chris- 
tian character  in  due  proportion  and  symmetry.  So  James,  i : 
4:  “That  ye  may  be  perfect  and  entire,  wanting  nothing.” 
Then  it  is  often  used  like  the  word  blameless,  to  mean  inward 
sincerity  and  a life  outwardly  irreproachable  in  the  sight  of 
men,  as  when  it  is  said  of  Noah,  that  “ he  was  perfect ; ” of 
Job,  that  “he  was  perfect  and  upright;  one  that  feared  God 
and  eschewed  evil  ” — Job  i.  This  is  precisely  the  equivalent  of 
the  description  given  of  Zacharias  and  Elizabeth — Luke  i : 6 : 
“ That  they  were  both  righteous  before  God,  walking  in  all  the 


400 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


commandments  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord  blameless.” 
Here  the  inward  righteousness  before  God  was  evinced  by  the 
visible  blameless  walk  in  the  ways  of  God,  without  any  breach 
■or  deviation  obnoxious  to  human  censure.  It  is  precisely  the 
equivalent  of  the  phraseology  applied  to  Christians  as  such — 
Phil,  ii : 14,  15:  “Do  all  things  without  murmuring  and  dis- 
puting, that  ye  may  be  blameless  and  harmless — the  sons  of 
God,  without  rebuke  in  the  midst  of  a crooked  and  perverse 
nation,  among  whom  ye  shine  as  lights  in  the  world,  holding 
forth  the  word  of  life.”  Surely  this  points  to  a kind  of  excel- 
lence which,  while  bringing  honor  to  Christ  and  his  religion, 
implies  no  sinless  perfection.  While  these  terms,  as  employed 
thus,  denote  a relative  perfection  in  the  sense  of  uprightness, 
integrity,  a conscientious  and  exemplary  life,  or  of  wholeness 
and  symmetry  of  the  Christian  virtues,  or  of  mature  growth, 
as  when  it  is  said  the  stony  ground  hearers  bring  forth  no  fruit 
unto  perfection,  they  do  not  mean  to  assert  sinless  perfection 
of  any  saints  on  earth.  Indeed,  it  is  so  demonstrable  that  the 
term  “ perfect  ” is  often  used  in  various  senses  in  the  Bible 
that  perfectionists  themselves  are  constrained  to  confess  it, 
and  thus  virtually  to  acknowledge  that  it  does  not  of  itself  im- 
port present  sinlessness  unless  the  surrounding  context  and 
the  analogy  of  faith  require  it.  Thus,  Mr.  See  says  (Rest  of 
Faith , p.  72):  “We  merely  say  of  another  term,  which  is  Chris- 
tian perfection,  that  if  the  candid  reader  will  refer  to  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Philippians,  third  chapter,  he  will  find  the  word 
“ perfect  ” used  in  two  senses.  The  one  referring  to  our  res- 
urrection perfection  (verse  12),  and  the  other  (verse  15)  refer- 
ring to  the  Christian  perfection,  which  we  must  conclude  was 
preached,  professed,  and  lived  in  Apostolic  times.  But  how 
does  it  appear  that  the  latter  was  sinless? 

Two  passages  are  constantly  quoted  in  behalf  of  the  doctrine 
we  combat,  which  show  the  impossibility  of  always  attaching 
the  literal  or  any  other  one  sense  to  words  used  in  Scripture. 
This  arises  from  the  poverty  and  ambiguity  of  language  which 
compel  us  to  use  words  In  varied  senses,  to  be  determined  in 
each  case  by  its  proper  exegetic  law.  We  refer  to  the  use  of 
“ fear”  in  the  passages,  “ perfect  love  casteth  out  fear,”  and  the 
injunction  that  we  “perfect  holiness  in  the  fear  of  God.” 

The  latter  fear  belongs  to  those  who  are  perfecting  holiness 


1877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


401 


at  every  stage  of  their  progress,  and  belongs  to  the  very  es- 
sence of  religion  in  both  worlds.  It  is  mingled  with  filial  love 
and  trust,  takes  the  form  of  reverence,  and  comes  of  that 
grace  whereby  we  serve  God  acceptably  with  reverence  and 
godly  fear — terms  which  are  equivalent.  The  former  is  des- 
cribed in  the  context  as  that  slavish  “ fear  which  hath  tor- 
ment ; ” which  is  none  other  than  that  spirit  of  bondage  which 
is  unto  fear — i.  e.,  servile  fear,  which  is  a repelling  dread,  in- 
stead of  a confiding,  revering,  attracting  love.  Love  in  pro- 
portion to  its  perfection  exorcises  this  fell  spirit  in  all  its  forms 
and  remnants  ; but  it  is  not  asserted  that  this  love  becomes 
perfect  in  this  life,  or  if  so,  that  sinless  perfection  is  meant. 

Much  is  said  of  “entire  sanctification,”  and  1 Thess.  v: 
23,  is  constantly  quoted  as  proving  it  in  the  sense  of  sinless 
perfection  in  this  life : “ And  the  very  God  of  peace  sanctify 
you  wholly  ; and  may  your  whole  spirit,  soul,  and  body  be  pre- 
served blameless  unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.” 
The  wholeness  of  our  sanctification  refers  to  all  the  parts  of 
our  being,  body,  soul,  and  spirit,  as  the  context  shows,  and 
may  signify  its  future  progressive  as  well  as  its  immediate  ac- 
complishment. Enough  has  already  been  said  in  regard  to 
the  Biblical  import  of  the  word  “blameless”  in  the  final 
clause. 

If  there  are  no  scriptural  proofs  of  sinless  perfection  in  this 
life,  there  are  abundant  and  decisive  scriptural  proofs  against 
it,  not  so  much  in  isolated  texts— though  these  are  not  want- 
ing—as  in  the  whole  tone  and  drift  of  the  inspired  portraitures 
of  Christian  experience.  “ If  we  say  we  have  no  sin,  we  de- 
ceive ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us” — 1 John  i : 8.  “ If 

I justify  myself,  mine  own  mouth  shall  condemn  me:  If  I say 
I am  perfect,  it  shall  prove  me  perverse.”  This  could  not  be 
true  of  the  claims  to  any  but  sinless  perfection,  as  other  kinds 
of  perfection  are  freely  ascribed  to  the  faithful  servants  of 
God.  The  Lord’s  prayer  is  for  all  Christians  of  every  age  and 
nation.  It  is  therefore  their  duty  always  to  pray,  “forgive  our 
trespasses,  even  as  we  forgive  those  who  trespass  against  us.” 
It  has  been  the  comfort  and  support  of  the  most  eminent 
saints  that  this  prayer  is  always  acceptable  to  God  and  becom- 
ing in  his  children.  Baxter  is  said  to  have  rejoiced  on  his  dying 
bed  that  the  publican’s  prayer,  “ God  be  merciful  to  me  a sin- 


402 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


tier,”  is  never  unacceptable  to  God.  Christians  are  always  laying 
aside  every  weight  (the  impedimenta  coming  upon  them  from 
the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil),  and  the  “ sin  which  so  easily 
besets  them  ” — (Heb.  xii)  ; and  “ striving  against  sin,”  if  need 
be,  “ resisting  it  even  unto  blood.” — ver.  4. 

Moreover,  that  chastisement  which  is  the  indispensable 
badge  of  sonship,  without  which  all  pretended  sons  are  but 
bastards,  is  for  sin — not  for  sins  long  past,  repented  of,  and 
given  up,  but  for  present  sins ; not  indeed  for  vengeance  and 
destruction,  but  in  fatherly  love  and  faithfulness  for  our  salva- 
tion— “ for  our  profit,  that  we  may  be  partakers  of  his  holi- 
ness.” This  shows  that  sin  still  cleaves  to  all  the  sons  of  God, 
for  which  they  need  divine  discipline  and  chastisement  in  order 
to  its  correction  and  removal  ; a chastening  which  they  must 
not  despise  on  the  one  hand,  nor  faint  or  despair  under  on  the 
other,  unless  they  would  miss  its  saving  benefits.  But  what 
less  than  remaining  sin  in  all  the  sons  of  God  does  all  this  im- 
ply? And  how  does  perfectionism  consist  with  that  chastise- 
ment of  which  all  but  bastards  are  partakers? 

The  Christian  conflict  so  vividly  depicted — Gal.  v:  17,  and 
Rom.  vii : 14,  25 — is  proof  incontestible  of  the  remains  of  the 
aaftB,  still  warring  against  the  spiritual  man,  producing  all 
manner  of  paradoxical  antagonisms  in  the  soul ; but  involving 
also  phenomena  impossible  in  the  unregenerate  soul.  For  in 
what  unregenerate  soul  does  the  spirit  lust  against  the  flesh? 
At  all  events,  was  it  not  to  the  experience  of  the  churches  of 
Galatia,  consisting  of  professed  Christian  converts,  that  he  was 
writing  ? 

And  after  all  the  efforts  to  torture  Rom.  vii.  into  a mere 
picture  of  the  phenomena  of  an  unregenerate  soul,  has  it  ever 
been  plausibly  shown  how  such  can  truly  say,  “ I love  the  law 
of  God  after  the  inward  man  ; ” “ with  the  mind  I myself 
serve  the  law  of  God,  but  with  the  flesh  the  law  of  sin.”  “ O 
wretched  man  that  I am  ! who  shall  deliver  me  from  the  body 
of  this  death  ? I thank  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.” 
If  this  is  the  language  of  impenitent  unbelievers,  where  shall  we 
find  what  is  distinctive  of  the  new-born  soul?  Do  we  need 
more  evidence  that  the  flesh,  and  sin  in  itself,  as  well  as  the  out- 
side world,  are  among  the  foes  with  which  the  Church  militant 
must  ever  contend  ? 


1877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


403 


If  we  do,  it  is  furnished  abundantly  in  the  statements,  un- 
foldings,  and  defences  of  sinless  perfection  given  by  its  advo- 
cates, whether  they  reach  it  from  the  Pelagian,  Arminian,  An- 
tinomian, Romish,  or  Mystic  sides.  Some  of  these  frequently 
run  or  develop  from  and  into  each  other. 

One  and  all,  they  are,  or  come  to  be,  essentially  Antinomian. 
This  is  a grave  charge.  It  suffices  to  overthrow  the  whole  of 
them,  not  only  as  in  absolute  antagonism  to  Christ’s  teaching 
and  standard,  who  came  not  to  destroy  the  law,  but  to  fulfill 
and  establish  it  in  every  jot  and  tittle  thereof,  but  as  in  and  of 
itself,  however  it  may  often  be  counteracted  by  other  influences, 
tending  to  foster  looseness  and  apostasy  in  life.  When  we  say 
that  they  are  essentially  Antinomian,  we  do  not  mean  that 
their  abettors  call  them  such.  Some  of  them,  like  John  Wes- 
ley, even  warn  its  adherents  against  Antinomianism.  And 
many  of  them  have  no  suspicion  that  the  scheme  logically  or 
practically  involves  such  a taint.  What  we  maintain,  how- 
ever, is,  that  its  advocates  really  take  Antinomian  ground  ; 
that  they  in  one  form  or  another  lower  the  standard  of  perfect 
holiness  below  the  only  perfect  and  immutable  standard  of 
goodness — i.  e.,  the  divine  law — to  some  vague  and  indetermi- 
nate level,  depending  on  and  varying  with  the  subjective  states 
of  each  person  who  supposes  himself  to  be  perfect.  With 
many — we  believe  with  most — each  one’s  assertion  of  his  own 
Christian  perfection  is  to  be  taken  and  treated  as  proof  of  it, 
unless  contradicted  by  unmistakable  impieties  or  immoralities. 
The  essential  thing  is,  that  the  perfection  claimed  and  insisted 
on  is  not  in  conformity  to  the  original,  true,  and  only  law  of 
God,  but  to  some  lower,  yet  undefined,  standard  level  to  the 
infirmities  and  incapacities  of  our  present  fallen  and  debased 
state.  This  is  enough  ; but  it  is  much  worse  to  leave  us  with- 
out any  tangible  and  clear  definition  of  the  infirmities  that  do 
and  do  not  involve  sin. 

1.  The  Romish  theory  of  perfection  lowers  the  original 
strictness  of  the  law  of  God  not  only  as  it  pronounces  evil 
concupiscence  to  be  no  longer  of  the  nature  of  sin,  as  the  law 
declares  in  forbidding  it  (Rom.  vii : 7),  but  as  it  allows  for  the 
tolerance  of  minor  or  venial,  in  distinction  from  mortal  sins. 
Thus  it  provides  for  an  easy  perfection  among  the  “ mass  and 
file”  of  its  average  members,  whose  lives  show  a very  imper- 


404 


The  Higher  Life 


[July. 


feet  perfection  in  holiness,  while  it  makes  room  for  an  extra- 
legal  perfection  in  the  select  classes  of  its  saints,  who  by  monas- 
tic vows  and  discipline,  or  other  volunteer  penances  and  self- 
inflictions, strive  thus  to  mortify  the  inclinations  and  remove 
the  temptations  to  sin.  This  they  rank  as  an  extra-legal  per- 
fection, which  consists  of  works  of  supererogation  and  surplus 
merit,  out  of  which  such  enormous  mischiefs  to  morals  and  re- 
ligion have  arisen.  This  was  a process  originally  devised  to 
mortify  the  flesh  and  subdue  or  extirpate  its  evil  concupiscen  ce, 
so  as  to  make  an  end  of  its  antagonism  to  the  law.  But  when 
they  adopted  the  dogma  that  concupiscence  had  not  the  nature 
of  sin,  thus  reducing  the  demands  of  the  law  to  this  level,  they 
raised  the  monastic  and  other  equivalent  discipline  and  volunteer 
self-inflictions  to  the  rank  of  extra-perfect  living  and  surplus 
merit.  They  denominated  the  super-legal  rules  prescribing  this 
discipline  “ evangelical  counsels.”  in  contradistinction  to  the 
mere  requirements  of  the  law,  thus  reduced  from  its  original 
strictness,  conformity  to  which  constituted  ordinary  Christian 
perfection.  This  perfection  pervades  the  good  acts  of  the 
faithful,  so  that  they,  each  and  all,  are  entirely  holy,  but  is 
compatible  at  the  same  time  with  venial  sins  intervening  be- 
tween them,  which  appear  to  be  acts  forbidden  by  the  original 
law  of  God,  and  therefore  requiring  pardon,  and  making  the 
petition  in  the  Lord’s  prayer  always  appropriate  ; but  never- 
theless not  bringing  under  condemnation  according  to  the  law 
as  reduced  to  the  present  level  of  human  infirmity,  and  so  not 
bringing  the  soul  into  jeopardy.  That  they  hold  good  works 
of  Christians  to  be  sinless,  the  following  utterance  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  Trent  evinces  : “ Si  quis  in  quolibet  bono  opere  justum 

saltern  venaliter  peccare  dixerit  . . . anathema  sit.”  The 

reason  of  this  is,  that  while  perfect  love  constitutes  the  extra- 
perfection of  select  saints  to  which  we  have  referred,  a mere 
defect  of  such  perfection  of  love  in  ordinary  saints  is  not  held 
to  be  of  the  nature  of  sin,  or  to  impart  any  taint  of  sin  to  works 
destitute  of  it.  Bellarmin,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Hodge,  says  : 
“ Defectus  charitatis,  quod  videlicet  non  faciemus  opera  nos- 
tra tanto  fervore  dilectionis,  quanto  faciemus  in  patria  defectus 
quidem  est,  sed  culpa  et  peceatum  non  est.  U nde  etiam  charitas 
nostra,  quamvis  comparata  ad  charitatem  beatorum  sit  imper- 
fecta, tamen  absolute  perfecta  dici  potest.”  Perfectionism, 


i877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection . 


405 


therefore,  as  maintained  by  the  Romanists,  lowers  the  law  of 
God  to  the  infirmities  and  defects  of  our  present  state,  and 
thus  destroys  its  authority.  The  perfection  it  advocates  is  not 
even  a pretence  of  sinless  conformity  to  that  law.  Nor  does 
it  lay  down  any  clear  line  of  demarcation  between  what  is  or 
what  is  not  now  obligatory  in  that  law  ; or  show  us  the  precise 
level  of  the  requirements  of  the  law  they  now  recognize  as  our 
binding  rule  of  action.  They  gain  perfect  holiness  not  by  lift- 
ing men  up  to  the  law,  but  by  bringing  the  law  down  to  them. 
See  Article  Perfectionism , in  Hodge’s  Theology,  vol.  III.,  p. 
245,  et  seq.  ; also,  Article  on  The  Protestant  Doctrine  of  Evan- 
gelical Perfection , in  “ British  and  Evangelical  Review”  for  Jan- 
uary, 1876.  Another  article  on  the  Means  and  Measzire  of 
Holiness,  in  which,  inter  alia , the  higher  life  views  of  Mr.  and 
Mrs.  Pearsall  Smith  are  sifted,  is  worthy  of  attention.  The 
sum  of  the  whole  is,  that  the  difference  between  the  Reformed 
and  Romanists  about  perfection  has  its  root  in  a difference  as 
to  what  is  sin,  and  how  far  the  divine  law  is  now  in  force.  Had 
the  latter  our  views  of  these  things,  the  claim  of  perfection 
would  sink  in  the  outcry,  “ Lord,  if  thou  wert  strict  to  mark 
iniquities,  who  could  stand  ? ” And  we  see  in  this,  as  we 
shall  in  other  schemes  to  be  noticed,  the  amazing  incongruity 
of  a theory  demanding  forgiveness  and  atonement  for  sinless 
and  faultless  conduct.  Its  supporters  establish  and  annul  the 
divine  law  in  the  same  breath. 

2.  We  find  the  same  Antinomian  element  in  the  Arminian  type 
of  perfectionism  which  we  take  up  before  the  Pelagian,  be- 
cause, though  not  first  in  original  historical  development,  it  has 
been  more  prominent  in  the  Protestant  churches,  chiefly  as 
being  a prime  article  of  Wesleyan  Methodism.  Wesley  says  : 
“The  best  of  men  still  need  Christ  in  his  priestly  office  to 
atone  for  their  omissions,  their  shortcomings  (as  some  not  im- 
properly speak),  their  mistakes  in  judgment  and  practice,  and 
their  defects  of  various  kinds.  For  these  are  all  deviations 
from  the  perfect  law,  and  consequently  need  an  atonement. 
Yet,  that  they  are  not  properly  sins,  we  apprehend  may  ap- 
pear from  the  words  of  St.  Paul:  ‘ He  that  loveth  hath  ful- 
filled the  law,  for  love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law.’ — Rom.  xiii : 
10.  Now,  mistakes  and  whatever  infirmities  naturally  flow 
from  the  corruptible  state  of  the  body  are  no  way  contrary  to 

(New  Series , No.  22.)  26 


406 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


love,  nor,  therefore,  in  the  Scriptural  sense,  sin.”  It  would 
seem  from  this  that  the  doctrine  is,  that  love  is  so  the  fulfilling- 
of  the  law  that  where  it  exists,  in  whatever  degree,  perfection 
exists,  and  there  can  be  no  infirmities  or  faults  which  are  prop- 
erly “sin.” 

Yet  he  cannot  abide  by  this,  and  goes  on  : “ To  explain  my- 
self a little  further  on  this  head  : I.  Not  only  sin  properly  so 
called — that  is,  voluntary  transgression  of  a known  law  ; but 
sin  improperly  so-called — that  is,  involuntary  transgression  of 
a divine  law,  known  or  unknown,  needs  the  atoning  blood.  2. 
I believe  there  is  no  such  perfection  in  this  life  as  excludes 
these  involuntary  transgressions,  which  I apprehend  to  be  nat- 
urally consequent  on  the  ignorance  and  mistakes  inseparable 
from  mortality.  3.  Therefore,  sinless  perfection  is  a phrase  I 
never  use  lest  I should  seem  to  contradict  myself.  4.  I be- 
lieve a person  filled  with  the  love  of  God  is  still  liable  to  these 
involuntary  transgressions.  5.  Such  involuntary'  transgres- 
sions you  may  call  sins  if  you  please ; I do  not,  for  the  reasons 
above  mentioned.”— Plain  Account  of  Christian  Perfection , 
Wesley’s  works,  vol.  I.,  pp.  28-9  ; Harper’s  edition,  1834. 

The  confusing  and  groundless  distinctions  here  set  forth  in 
support  of  this  scheme  are  enough  to  throw  suspicion  upon  it, 
even  if  they  could  be  sustained,  as  they  cannot  be  in  any  de- 
gree which  will  make  them  serve  their  purpose.  What  is  un- 
deniable is,  that  the  perfection  maintained  is  below  some 
requirements  of  the  divine  law  known  or  unknown  to  its  pos- 
sessor ; that  his  transgressions  of,  or  want  of  conformity  to,  the 
same  require  to  be  atoned  for  by  Christ’s  blood ; that  he  will 
neither  venture  to  call  these  sins,  nor  the  normal  state  to  which 
they  belong  one  of  sinless  perfection  ; that  all  sins  arising  from 
ignorance  are  of  this  innocent  character,  which  does  not  mar 
the  Christian  perfection  contended  for  ; that  in  these  are  in- 
cluded those  arising  “ from  the  corruptible  state  of  the  body,” 
which,  when  we  consider  the  mysterious  union  of  soul  and 
body,  and  the  implication  of  the  moral  states  and  actings  of  the 
former  with  those  of  the  latter,  have  a vast,  undefined  reaefq 
excluding,  who  can  tell  what,  actions  from  the  category  of  sin? 
What  of  the  acts  arising  from  a drunkard’s  appetite,  the  “ eyes 
full  of  adultery,”  the  “ feet  swift  to  shed  blood,”  the  “ poison 
of  asps  under  the  lips,”  of  the  very  flesh  itself,  which,  though 


1877.] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


407 


not  meaning  the  body  simply,  mean  the  whole  man  as  impli- 
cated with,  affecting,  and  affected  by  the  body,  lusting  against 
the  spirit,  so  that  no  less  a saint  than  Paul,  therewith,  to  some 
extent  at  least,  still  “ served  the  law  of  sin  ? ” 

Then,  as  to  faults  and  wrongs  committed,  or  duties  omitted, 
through  ignorance.  Some  of  our  most  dangerous  sins  are  sins 
of  ignorance.  Nay,  the  very  ignorance  of  moral  and  Christian 
duty  is  itself  often  most  culpable,  and  incurs  the  divine  con- 
demnation, even  the  woe  upon  those  who  call  good  evil  and 
evil  good  ; who  put  light  for  darkness  and  darkness  for  light. 
It  is  the  very  essence  of  sin  to  be  deceitful,  to  disguise  itself, 
to  hate  the  light,  and  refuse  to  come  to  the  light  which  would 
unveil  it — and  is  not  this  declared  by  the  Light  of  the  world  to 
be  eminently  its  condemnation  ? What ! do  men  become  in- 
nocent by  blinding  themselves  to  their  guilt,  and  sinless  by 
ignoring  their  sin  ? Paul  “verily  thought  that  he  ought  to  do 
many  things  contrary  to  the  name  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.”  Can 
a man  be  innocent  and  perfect  in  persecuting  the  Church,  what- 
ever his  ignorance  or  sincerity  therein  ? Out  upon  such  casu- 
istry, no  matter  how  plausible  and  acceptable  it  may  be  to  a 
worldly  and  backslidden  church,  or  those  who  think  they  are 
something  when  they  are  nothing,  or  who  “ say  they  are  per- 
fect,” by  whatsoever  names  sanctioned  ! 

And  as  to  the  distinction  of  voluntary  and  involuntary  trans- 
gressions or  shortcomings,  who  can  know  where  this  will  lead 
us  until  we  have  a clear  definition  of  the  terms  to  show 
whether  it  and  its  corresponding  adjectives  are  used,  as  was 
common  down  to  the  days  of  Edwards  and  Reid,  for  all  the 
non-cognitive  powers  of  the  soul,  including  moral  habits  and 
states,  or  in  the  more  restricted  later  meaning  of  many,  in 
which  it  excludes  not  merely  the  cognitive,  but  the  sensitive, 
affectional,  appetitive,  or  orectic — all  the  optative  powers  of 
the  soul,  even  in  regard  to  moral  and  spiritual  duties,  but  that 
of  deliberate  choice?  If  so,  there  is  no  end  to  the  deformities 
and  sins  which  may  consist  with  this  sort  of  perfection,  and 
which  even  the  Romanists  would  find  it  hard  to  pass  over  as 
venial  sins. 

In  all  this,  Wesley  simply  goes  in  the  track  of  the  leading 
Arminian  divines.  Limborch,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Hodge,  in  the 
chapter  already  referred  to,  styles  this  obedience  “ perfect  as 


408 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


being,  correspondent  to  the  stipulation  contained  in  the  divine 
covenant.”  “ It  is  not  a sinless  or  absolutely  perfect  obedi- 
ence, but  such  as  consists  in  a sincere  love  and  habit  of  piety, 
which  excludes  all  habits  of  sin,  with  all  enormous  and  deliber- 
ate actions.”  But  it  does  not,  according  to  this,  exclude  all 
sins.  So  Fletcher  and  others  are  quoted  to  the  same  effect. 

“ With  respect  to  the  Christless  law  of  paradisaic  obedience, 
we  utterly  disclaim  sinless  perfection.”  “ We  shall  not  be 
judged  by  that  law,  but  by  a law  adapted  to  our  present  state 
and  circumstances,  called  the  law  of  Christ.”  What  ! is  this  law 
of  Christ  laxer  than  the  original  law  of  God,  and  who  will  de- 
fine it  so  that  imperfect  conformity  to  it  may  be  certainly 
known  and  tested  ? 

Recent  Arminian  and  Wesleyan  writers  take  a similar  posi- 
tion. Thus,  Binney’s  Improved  Theological  Compend  teaches  : 
“ Errors  of  judgment,  infirmities  of  body,  fears  occasioned  by 
surprise,  unpleasant  dreams,  wandering  thoughts  in  prayer, 
times  when  there  is  no  joy,  a sense  of  insufficiency  in  Christian 
labor,  and  strong  temptation,  are  by  no  means  inconsistent 
with  perfect  love.  Yet  errors  need  the  atonement”  (p.  132). 
So  the  late  Bishop  Janes,  in  his  introduction  to  the  book  enti- 
tled Pioneer  Experiences , says  that  “ while  entire  sanctification 
makes  us  perfect  Christians,  it  does  not  make  us  perfect  men. 
Our  bodies  have  been  greatly  impaired  by  the  fall.  We  are 
encompassed  with  infirmities.  Our  knowledge  is  imperfect  ; 
our  judgment  fallible.  We  shall  need  the  reconstruction  of 
the  judgment  day  to  make  us  perfect  men.  But,  thank  God, 
His  grace  can  make  us  perfect  Christians,  now  and  here”  (p. 
9).  The  distinction  between  perfect  Christians  and  perfect 
men,  in  a moral  sense,  we  understand  to  be  that  between  those 
who  keep  the  original  and  perfect  law  of  God,  and  those  who 
keep  some  supposed  and  undefined  relaxation  of  it,  called  the 
law  of  Christ  or  the  Gospel.  Conformity  to  this  relaxed 
standard  is  the  perfection  claimed. 

Dr.  Crane,  in  the  little  volume  already  referred  to,  so  appre- 
hends the  difficulties  of  thus  holding  to  a perfection  that  is  not 
perfect,  that  he  sets  himself  to  discover  and  remove  the  cause  of 
Wesley  and  others  of  this  school  being  thrown  into  an  atti- 
tude so  weak  and  vacillating.  He  finds  it  in  Wesley  s still 
retaining  in  his  creed  that  clause  of  the  Anglican  articles  which 


1877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


409 


asserts  that  “ this  infection  of  nature  doth  remain,  yea,  in  them 
that  are  regenerated.”  He  thinks  it  essential  to  any  consist- 
ent holding  of  the  doctrine  of  perfection  that  this  be  aban- 
doned. He  is  not  far  wrong.  It  is  difficult  to  maintain  the 
co-existence  of  a corrupt  /^perfection  of  nature  with  sinless 
perfection,  without  lowering  the  divine  requirements  so  as  to 
take  this  “ infection”  and  its  fruits  out  of  the  category  of 
sin,  or  sinful  imperfections,  while  yet  conceding  that  they  are 
contrary  to  the  original  and  perfect  law  of  God.  But  notwith- 
standing the  protestation  of  Dr.  Crane,  the  evidence  is  pain- 
fully abundant  that  this  “ infection”  does  remain  in  the  best 
of  men.  And  those  know  it  most  who  know  themselves  best. 
On  the  other  hand,  if  no  such  infection  remains  in  the  regen- 
erate, it  is  difficult  to  see  how  their  sanctification  is  not  entire, 
and  why  each  and  every  regenerate  person  is  not  perfectly 
sinless.  This  contradicts  his  doctrine,  that  a large  proportion 
of  Christians  are  yet  imperfect,  and  that  entire  sanctification  is 
rarely  attained  at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  life.  This 
book  of  Dr.  Crane  is  mainly  a critique  on  Wesley’s  modes  of 
stating  and  defending  perfection.  He  is  successful  in  expos- 
ing their  weakness  and  fallacy ; but  we  do  not  see  that  his 
own  position  is  any  stronger.  This  is  not  his  fault.  The  fault 
lies  in  the  nature  of  the  doctrine  itself.  It  runs  so  counter  to 
Scripture  and  normal  Christian  experience  that  it  admits  of  no 
strong  and  consistent  statement  and  defense.  Hence  we  are 
not  surprised  when  Dr.  Crane  tells  us  that — 

“ Hardly  one  in  twenty  of  our  ministers  professes  it,  either  publicly  or 
privately,  so  far  as  I can  learn.  We  preach  it  occasionally ; but  among  our 
people  its  confessors  are  still  fewer,  in  proportion  to  members,  than  in  the 
ministry.  Even  among  our  bishops,  from  1784  to  the  present  day,  con- 
fessors are  as  hard  to  find  as  in  any  other  class  of  our  people.  The  very 
princes  of  our  Israel  have  been  silent  in  regard  to  their  own  experience  of  it. 
The  apostolic  Wesley  never  professed  it.  In  the  sixty-fourth  year  of  his  age 
and  the  forty-second  of  his  ministry  he  published  in  one  of  the  leading  jour- 
nals of  London  a letter  containing  these  words  : ‘ I have  told  all  the  world 
1 am  not  perfect j I have  not  attained  the  character  I draw.’  Bishop  As- 
bury,  who,  if  possible,  exceeded  Wesley  in  the  toils  and  sufferings  of  his 
fruitful  ministry,  did  not  profess  it.  The  saintly  Hedding,  approaching  the 
grave  by  lingering  disease,  always  calm,  and  often  joyous  in  view  of  death, 
was  importuned  to  profess  it,  and  declined.  Myriads  of  men  and  women 
among  us,  whose  lives  were  bright  with  a holy  light,  saints  of  whom  the 
world  was  not  worthy,  never  professed  it”. — Pp.  14,  15. 


4io  The  Higher  Life  [July, 

Even  so ; and  this  no  way  to  their  detriment,  however  it 
may  be  to  the  doctrine  of  sinless  perfection  here  below. 

3.  If  we  examine  the  Pelagian  or  semi-Pelagian  doctrine  of 
Perfection  we  shall  find  it  equally  in  derogation  of  the  contin- 
ued authority  of  the  divine  law.  The  essential  difference  be- 
tween this  and  the  Arminian  is,  that  the  latter  asserts  that 
the  ability,  be  it  natural  or  moral,  to  render  such  obedience  as 
is  required  by  the  law  of  Christ  and  constitutes  Christian  Per- 
fection, is  itself  largely  the  result  of  a gracious  assistance  given 
to  reinforce  the  weakness  induced  by  the  fall.  The  law  is  low- 
ered and  our  weakness  strengthened,  until  our  increased  ability 
and  God’s  reduced  requirements  meet  and  become  commen- 
surate. The  Pelagian  theory,  however,  maintains  that  our  nat- 
ural powers  in  their  native  moral  state  ar e,  per  se,  adequate  to 
fulfill  the  demands  of  the  law  ; that  no  law  can  be  binding,  i.e., 
be  a law,  w’hich  surpasses  our  full  ability  without  divine  aid 
to  keep  it.  Pelagius  himself  accordingly  held  that  the  fall  did 
not  debilitate  our  moral  powers,  and  that  they  still  remain, 
equal  to  keeping  the  law  in  its  original,  unabated  strictness. 
The  evident  opposition  between  this  view  of  the  present  con- 
dition of  human  nature  and  the  representations  of  Scripture, 
reinforced  by  both  the  natural  and  Christian  consciousness,  has 
rendered  it  difficult  for  any  but  the  lowest  of  Socinian  and  Ra- 
tionalistic divines  to  entertain  or  adhere  to  it.  Hence  the  fun- 
damental thesis  that  no  binding  law  can  exceed  our  ability, 
whether  natural  or  moral,  is  brought  to  bear  in  a semi-Pelagian 
or  Arminian  way,  to  lower  the  demands  of  the  law  to  the  moral 
state  and  ability  of  a race  lapsed  into  such  weakness.  Men  are 
in  some  degree  corrupted  and  debilitated  by  the  fall,  to  be 
sure ; but  the  requirements  of  the  law  are  accommodated  to 
their  weakness,  and  they  are  fully  adequate  to  keep  it  perfect- 
ly ; nor  can  they  be  under  obligation  to  obey  any  law  which 
they  are  not  fully  able  perfectly  to  keep.  It  is  in  this  line  that 
perfectionism  has  been  developed  in  this  country  by  those 
whose  metaphysical  or  philosophical  views  in  theology  made 
this  the  most  obvious  route  to  sinless  perfection.  When  we 
were  students  in  theology,  a little  coterie,  becoming  wiser  than 
their  teachers  or  fellow-students,  strained  the  doctrine  of  abil- 
ity beyond  the  scope  contended  for  or  admitted  by  its  most 
eminent  champions,  to  the  length  of  maintaining,  not  only  that 


1 8 77-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


41 1 


all  men  can,  but  that  some  do,  reach  sinless  perfection  in  this 
life,  of  which,  so  far  as  the  students  there  were  concerned,  a trio 
or  so  were  the  principal  confessors.  The  net  result  of  the 
whole  was  that  the  leader,  instead  of  going  forward  into  the 
ministry,  ran  into  various  socialistic  and  free-love  heresies,  on 
the  basis  of  which  he  founded  the  Putney  and  Oneida  com- 
munities, over  the  latter  of  which  he  now  presides.  Other  spo- 
radic outbreaks  of  the  distemper  appeared  here  and  there  in 
the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  communions,  or  among 
separatists  and  come-outers  from  them,  these  often  uniting 
with  the  radicals  or  advanced  reformers  of  other  communions. 

But  the  only  strong  and  serious  development  in  this  line  had 
for  its  centre  Oberlin,  and  for  its  great  expositors  and  defend- 
ers Professor  Finney  and  President  Mahan.  The  Oberlin 
Evafigelist  and  Quarterly  Review  were  the  organs  for  propagat- 
ing and  defending  this  scheme.  These  are  not  now  within  our 
reach,  and  we  are  obliged  to  depend  on  the  undisputed  quota- 
tions from  them  in  the  controversial  papers  of  the  time.  The 
Princeton  Review,  for  April,  1841,  p.  241,  quotes,  from  the 
Oberlin  Evangelist,  vol.  2,  p.  50,  Mr.  Finney  as  saying: 

“It  is  objected  that  this  doctrine  (of  perfect  sanctification)  lowers  the 
standard  of  holiness  to  our  own  experience.  It  is  not  denied  that  in  some 
instances  this  may  have  been  true.  Nor  can  it  be  denied  that  the  standard 
of  Christian  perfection  has  been  elevated  much  above  the  demands  of  the 
law  in  its  application  to  human  beings  in  our  present  state  of  existence.  It 
seems  to  have  been  forgotten  that  the  inquiry  is,  What  does  the  law  de- 
mand?— not  of  angels,  and  what  would  be  entire  sanctification  in  them  ; nor 
of  Adam  previously  to  the  fall,  when  his  powers  of  body  and  mind  were  all 
in  a state  of  perfect  health  ; nor  what  will  the  law  demand  of  us  in  a future 
state  of  existence  ; not  what  the  law  may  demand  of  the  church  in  some  fu- 
ture periods  of  its  history  on  earth,  when  the  human  constitution,  by  the 
universal  prevalence  of  thorough  temperance  principles,  may  have  acquired 
its  pristine  health  and  powers ; but  the  question  is,  What  does  the  law  of 
God  require  of  Christians  in  the  present  generation,  of  Christians  in  all  re- 
spects in  our  circumstances,  with  all  the  ignorance  and  debility  of  body  and 
mind  which  have  resulted  from  the  intemperance  and  abuse  of  the  human 
constitution  through  so  many  generations  ? 

“ The  law  levels  its  claims  to  us  as  we  are,  and  a just  exposition  of  it,  as  I 
have  already  said,  under  all  the  present  circumstances  of  our  being,  is  indis- 
pensable to  a right  apprehension  of  what  constitutes  entire  sanctification.” 

Unmistakably  this  asserts  that  the  law  lowers  its  claims  to 
our  strength  as  debilitated  by  sin  and  corruption.  But  when  is 


412 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


this  process  of  deterioration  to  stop,  which,  it  has  been  well 
said,  makes  sin  “ its  own  remedy  and  apology”?  It  is  easy 
enough  to  be  perfectly  sanctified,  according  to  such  a standard. 
Can  any  one  tell  how  far  men,  by  sinning,  may  become  enslaved 
to  sin,  without  making  this  very  servitude,  the  very  invincible- 
ness and  obduracy  of  sin,  their  own  apology,  whether  in  this 
world  or  the  realms  of  outer  darkness?  Or  is  there  any  lower 
deep  beneath  this  lowest  deep  in  which  this  ceases  to  be?  It 
is  obvious  on  the  face  of  the  foregoing  presentation  why  this 
form  of  Antinomianism  may,  like  that  of  the  Romanists,  lead 
to  a certain  outward  ascetic  as  well  as  inward  looseness  in  its 
regimen  and  cultus. 

But  another  strange  result  was  logically  reached  by  over- 
straining what  was  formerly  known  as  the  “ Exercise  Scheme” 
to  extreme  consequences  wholly  unlooked  for,  and  repudiated 
by  many  of  its  supporters.  Said  Mr.  Finney,  Ob.  Evan.,  vol 
I.,  p.  42.,  et passim  : 

“ It  seems  to  be  a very  general  opinion  that  there  is  such  a thing  as  im- 
perfect obedience  to  God,  i.  e.,  as  respects  one  and  the  same  act,  but  I 
cannot  see  how  an  imperfect  obedience  relating  to  one  and  the  same  act 
can  be  possible.  Imperfect  obedience.'  What  can  be  meant  by  this  but 
disobedient  obedience  ! A sinful  holiness  Now,  to  decide  the  character  of 
any  act,  we  must  bring  it  into  the  light  of  the  law  of  God;  if  agreeable  to 
the  law,  it  is  obedience — it  is  right — wholly  right.  If  it  is  in  any  respect 
different  from  what  the  law  of  God  requires,  it  is  wrong — wholly  wrong." 

According  to  this  there  is  no  medium  between  a state  of 
perfect  sinlessness  on  the  one  hand,  and  perfect  impenitence 
on  the  other.  The  soul  is  liable  to  alternations  from  one  to 
the  other  each  successive  moment,  and  with  each  transient  in- 
stantaneous volition.  No  enduring  moral  bias  deeper  than 
such  momentary  volitions  is  recognized.  And  as  each  of 
these  follows  each,  he  may  soar  one  moment  to  the  summit 
of  absolute  perfection,  to  plunge  the  next  moment  to  the 
abyss  of  carnal  obduracy.  This  is  no  unfair  interpretation  of 
this  system  by  an  adversary.  It  is  precisely  that  given  by  a 
leader  in  Higher  Life  teaching,  when  comparing  and  endeavor- 
ing to  harmonize  into  substantial  unity  the  theoretical  grounds 
adopted  by  different  classes  of  its  advocates.  Says  Boardman, 
Higher  Life , pp.  61-2  : 

“ For  the  Oberlinian  idea  that  the  experience  brings  the  soul  into  a state 
of  sinless  perfection  or  entire  sanctification  the  grounds  must  be  sought  in 


1 877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


413 


three  things : first,  their  philosophy  of  the  will,  according  to  which  each 
volition  or  choice  is  in  itself  absolutely  holy,  or  absolutely  unholy  and 
altogether  so.  So  that  when  God  is  chosen,  while  that  choice  is  predom- 
inant, the  soul  is  perfectly  holy ; and  when  the  world  is  chosen,  then  while 
that  choice  is  uppermost,  then  the  soul  is  perfectly  sinful.  This,  with  their 
view  of  the  law  of  God  as  graduated  to  the  sinner’s  condition,  whatever  it 
is,  not  requiring  of  all  alike  the  same  entire  conformity  to  the  absolute  and 
unchangeable  standard  of  heavenly  holiness,  but  claiming  no  more  than  the 
sinner’s  earthly  blindness  permits  him  to  see,  and  no  more  than  his  earthly 
weakness  permits  him  to  do.  And  to  these  two  a third  must  be  added  : viz., 
their  definition  of  sanctification,  according  to  which  it  is  consecration  only — 
or  setting  apart  to  God — and  so  is  man’s  own  work,  instead  of  God’s. 
Whereas,  according  to  the  popular  acceptation,  sanctification  is  the  work  of 
God  in  the  soul  after  it  is  set  apart  to  God  by  voluntary  consecration. 
These  three  things  taken  together,  and  taken  together  with  the  experience, 
may  serve  to  show  us  why  and  how  the  Oberlinians  adopt  the  terms  and 
accept  the  idea  of  ‘ entire  sanctification’  as  attained  in  the  experience.” 

If  the  Antinomian  character  of  this  system,  in  its  different 
forms  and  potencies,  has  been  proved,  then  it  makes  out  sinless 
perfection  by  lowering  the  divine  law  to  men.  It  is  also  certain 
that  not  only  can  its  advocates  take  and  hold  no  uniform 
and  consistent  position  on  the  subject,  or  draw  any  clear  line 
between  the  perfectly  and  the  imperfectly  sanctified,  but  much 
of  their  reasoning  is  to  the  effect  that  all  Christians  are  entire- 
ly sanctified.  This  is  the  necessary  consequence  of  the  Ober- 
linian  dogmatic  which  acknowledges  no  holy  act  which  is  not 
perfectly  holy,  but  of  all  arguments  in  its  favor  based  on  Scrip- 
tural passages  that  apply  indiscriminately  to  all  the  saints. 
This  is  so  inevitable  that  one  of  the  recent  treatises  on  this  sub- 
ject is  written  for  the  express  purpose  of  proving  that  there  is 
no  conversion  from  sin  save  to  spotless  purity  ; that“  sanctifica- 
tion admits  of  no  degrees,  and  is  never  used  in  a limited  sense 
designating  degrees  of  cleanness  or  purity.  If  a thing  or  being 
has  the  least  degree  of  uncleanness  or  defilement,  it  is  unsanc- 
tified.”* 

Dr.  Crane  says:  “ The  ablest  writers  who  have  discussed  this 
subject,  on  the  residue  theory  of  infection  of  nature  still  remain- 
ing in  the  regenerate,  have  not  been  able  in  their  descriptions 
of  the  Christian  life  to  maintain  a clear,  practical  distinction 
between  those  who  are  supposed  to  be  simply  regenerate  and 


*The  Old  Paths , a Treatise  on  Sanctification , by  Rev.  Thomas  Mitchell. 


4*4 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


those  who  are  accounted  to  be  freed  from  all  depravity.”  [We 
have  seen  what  those  are  capable  of  who  ignore  or  fritter 
away  this  infection.]  He  proves  by  quotations  from  Wesley 
that  he  sometimes  puts  the  “ religious  state  of  the  sanctified 
man  below  that  of  one  who  is  simply  born  of  God.”  That  he 
now  represents  the  perfect  man  as  liable  to  “ something  wrong, 
in  tempers,  words  and  actions,”  and  now  as  exceeding  the  im- 
perfect Christian  in  being  “ freed  from  evil  thoughts  and  evil 
tempers.”  Dr.  Wakefield  is  quoted  by  Dr.  Crane  as  saying 
that  “ entire  sanctification  does  not  differ  in  essence  from  re- 
generation.”— See  Holiness  the  Birthright  of  God's  Children, 
pp.  83-86. 

But  it  may  be  asked,  however  wrong  theoretically  and  doc. 
trinally,  must  not  the  effects  of  such  a standard  of  life  as  entire 
sanctification  be  benign  and  purifying?  We  do  not  believe  that 
error  can  promote  holiness.  God  sanctifies  by  his  truth,  and 
his  word  is  truth.  Important  life-giving  truths  may  accident- 
ally become  associated  in  the  view  of  many  with  baneful  errors, 
and  may  exert  their  proper  purifying  influence,  and  serve  as 
an  antidote  to  the  errors  which  accidentally  contributed  to 
give  them  prominence.  We  believe  that  the  Millerite  delu- 
sion prevalent  about  the  year  1843,  that  the  second  advent  of 
Christ  was  to  occur  in  that  year,  and  on  some  certain  day  of 
it,  was  overruled  of  God  to  the  awakening  of  many  callous 
persons  from  their  soul-destroying  slumbers  to  prepare  to  meet 
their  God  by  embracing  his  salvation.  Yet  it  was  a fatal  delu- 
sion to  those  who  hung  their  faith  upon  its  truth,  while  it 
served  to  harden  the  sceptical  and  worldly  in  their  inclination 
to  regard  Christianity  as  mere  fanaticism  or  imposture. 

There  is  no  question  that,  in  the  minds  of  many  good  people, 
the  higher  life  movement  has  a grasp  on  their  consciences  and 
hearts,  owing  to  its  arousing  them  to  recognize  and  feel  the 
duty  of  rising  to  higher  grades  of  sanctity  and  consecration, 
greater  elevation  above  self  and  the  world.  Furthermore,  it 
is  often  confounded  with  that  assurance  of  hope  which  is  the 
common  privilege  of  justified  persons,  who,  though  imperfectly 
sanctified,  evince  the  genuineness  of  their  faith  to  themselves 
and  others  by  their  Christian  works  ; who  thus  assure  their  hearts 
before  God,  and  know  that  they  know  Christ  because  they 
keep  his  commandments ; who  also  receive  in  and  through  all 


!8  77-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


415 


this  the  witness  of  the  Spirit  with  their  spirits  that  they  are  the 
children  of  God.  But  all  these  truths,  duties  and  privileges 
are  better  gained  and  conserved  without  this  pretension  of 
higher  life,  and  perfect  holiness,  and  assumed  superiority  to 
the  great  brotherhood  of  the  redeemed,  than  when  burdened 
with  these  fungus  parasites.  In  themselves  considered,  and 
in  their  own  proper  influence  and  tendencies,  we  regard  them 
as  evil  only,  and  that  continually.  It  is  proper  to  add,  more- 
over, that  not  all  who  join  in  these  higher  life  movements  em- 
brace the  perfectionism  which  so  largely  underlies  and  perme- 
ates them.  They  are  conscious  only  of  arriving  simply  and 
purely  at  a higher  Christian  life,  and  deeper  experience.  These 
constitute  the  only  truth  and  good  accompanying  such  move- 
ments that  are  likely  to  give  them  power. 

1.  We  deem  it  a great  evil  for  those  to  think  themselves 
perfectly  holy  who  are  not  so,  or  at  best  only  imperfectly  so. 
It  is  an  evil  which  makes  a dangerous  approach  to  thinking 
themselves  something  when  they  are  nothing.  It  fosters  spir- 
itual pride,  and  is  destructive  of  humility.  It  checks  or  stops 
struggles  to  overcome  indwelling  sin,  and  to  advance  to  a 
nearer  conformity  to  the  divine  law.  Instead  of  stimulating  us 
to  forget  the  things  which  are  behind  and  press  forward  to 
those  which  are  before,  it  makes  us  easy  with  our  present  at- 
tainments in  holiness,  “as  though  we  had  already  attained  or 
were  already  perfect.”  We  are  quite  aware,  and  do  nof  mean 
to  question,  that  these  people  hold  to  a continual  growth  in  the 
Christian  life  ; but  it  is  such  a growth  as  takes  place  in  heaven 
— a growth  in  general  capacity,  but  not  in  moral  purity  or  free- 
dom from  sin.  This  is  already  perfect,  and  cannot  be  more 
than  perfect.  So  they  no  longer  need  to  die  unto  sin.  It  is 
already  extinct  within  them.  It  is  as  if  in  our  investigations 
of  truth  we  should  take  remaining  ignorance  for  perfect  and 
infallible  knowledge. 

2.  Closely  connected  with  this  is  the  denial  and  stoppage  of 
growth  in  sanctification  by  struggling  toward  its  entireness 
and  perfection  and  ever  making  closer  approximations  to  it, 
till  all  sin  disappears  in  the  spirits  of  the  just  made  perfect. 
The  favorite  doctrine  of  these  people  is,  that  as  perfect  justifi- 
cation is  received  at  the  new  birth  by  the  initial  act  of  faith,  so, 
at  some  later  period,  perfect  sanctification  is  received  instanta- 


416 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


neously  by  a single  act  of  faith.  And  this  is  variously  styled 
the  rest  of  faith,  the  rest  of  the  soul,  &c.,  &c.,  implying  that 
the  soul  rests  at  peace  in  its  reliance  on  Christ  for  sanctifi- 
cation as  well  as  justification,  and  this  in  such  a sense  as  to  be 
freed  from  the  necessity  of  working  to  promote  holiness,  and  sub- 
due sin  within  us,  in  the  same  way  and  measure  as  in  our  justi- 
fication, which  is  wholly  by  faith  to  the  exclusion  of  all  works 
of  our  own.  “ Thus,”  says  one  of  these  writers,  “ sanctifica- 
tion, like  regeneration,  is  a supernatural,  instantaneous  work ; 
and  not  a human,  gradual  work.  Both  are  God’s  work.  Both 
are  instantaneous.” — Purity  and  Maturity,  p.  223.  “There  is 
no  gradual  growing  out  of  sin.” — Id.  p.  145.  This  is  very  unsafe 
teaching.  The  constant  teaching  of  Scripture,  confirmed  by 
sound  Christian  experience,  is  that  we  “ work  out  our  own  sal- 
vation with  fear  and  trembling,  while  God  works  in  us  to  will  and 
to  do”;  that  this  is  a continuous  process,  and  that  we  never  cease, 
not  merely  works  of  holy  living  and  service  according  to  the 
measure  of  our  present  attainment,  but  in  striving  against  sin 
in  heart  and  life,  laying  aside  the  sin  which  easily  besets  us. 

And  we  have  observed  that  even  those  who  come  to  perfec- 
tionism by  the  Pelagian  or  semi-Pelagian  method  of  plenary 
ability  without  divine  grace  to  perfectly  keep  the  divine  law, 
no  sooner  conceive  themselves  to  have  attained  perfection  in 
the  exercise  of  this  ability  than  they  reverse  their  attitude  into 
one  of  almost  passive  receptivity — of  simply  receiving  by  one 
act  of  faith  the  gift  from  the  fulness  of  Christ — of  waiting,  rest- 
ing in  Christ,  to  the  discarding  of  all  works  or  efforts  of  our 
own,  or  in  our  own  strength  as  subservient  thereto.  A notable 
case  of  some  remarkable  and  elevated  phases  of  this  experience 
is  found  in  the  27th  chapter  of  Mr.  Finney’s  Autobiography. 
Those  who  read  it  will  find  how  he  “ seemed  to  be  in  a state  of 
perfect  rest,”  even  to  the  point  of  a super-scriptural,  if  not  anti- 
scriptural,  Hopkinsian  submission,  in  respect  to  “the  salva- 
tion or  damnation  of  his  own  soul,  as  the  will  of  God  might 
decide”  ; his  mind  “ too  full  of  the  subject  to  preach  anything 
but  a full  and  present  salvation  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.” 
“ What  I had  been  praying  for,  for  myself,  I had  received  in  a 
way  that  I least  expected.  Holiness  to  the  Lord  seemed  to 
be  inscribed  on  all  the  exercises  of  my  mind.  I had  such 
strong  faith  that  God  would  accomplish  all  his  perfect  will,  that 


T 877.] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


417 


I could  not  be  careful  about  anything.”  . . . “ I then  realized 
what  is  meant  by  the  saying,  that  he  is  able  to  do  exceeding 
abundantly  above  all  that  we  ask  or  think.  He  did  at  that 
time  teach  me,  indefinitely,  above  all  that  I had  ever  asked  or 
thought.  I had  had  no  conception  of  the  length  and  breadth, 
and  height  and  depth,  and  efficiency  of  his  grace.  It  seemed 
then  to  me  that  that  passage,  ‘ My  grace  is  sufficient  for  thee,’ 
meant  so  much,  that  it  was  wonderful  I had  never  understood 
it  before,”  etc.,  etc.  Much  in  this  chapter  verges  upon  an  ele- 
vated tone  of  hyper-Calvinism,  Mysticism,  and  Quietism.  So 
Dr.  Mahan  ( Pioneer  Experiences , p.  14)  says:  “For  sanctifica- 
tion, on  the  other  hand,  to  overcome  the  world,  the  flesh  and 
the  devil,  I had  depended  mainly  upon  my  own  resolutions. 
Here  was  my  grand  mistake,  and  the  source  of  all  my  bondage 
under  sin.”  . . . “ If  my  propensities  which  lead  to  sin  are  cru- 
cified, I know  that  it  must  be  done  by  an  indwelling  Christ  ” 
(p.  17).  He  proceeds  to  state  his  belief  “ that  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  has  provided  special  grace  for  the  entire  sanctification  of 
every  individual.  . . . The  first  inquiry  with  me  is,  in  what  re- 
spect do  I need  the  grace  of  Christ?  . . . Thus  having  discov- 
ered my  special  necessities  in  any  one  of  the  particulars  above 
referred  to,  my  next  object  is  to  take  some  promise  applicable 
to  the  particular  necessity  before  me,  and  to  go  directly  to 
Christ  for  the  supply  of  that  particular  necessity.”  This  is  all 
right  on  two  suppositions:  1 — that  in  these  approaches  to 
Christ  for  sanctifying  grace,  the  sufficient  grace  be  expected 
according  to  the  measure  of  the  present  dispensation,  but 
not  in  the  measure  of  sinless  perfection  ; and  2 — that  it  be  in 
such  wise  that  Christ’s  working  in  us  to  will  and  to  do  the 
things  pleasing  in  his  sight  will  be  evinced  by  our  working  out 
our  own  salvation,  even  if  with  (holy)  fear  and  trembling.  But 
all  will  recognize  in  this  the  complete  swinging  from  the  ex- 
treme of  self-sufficient  reliance  on  native  powers  to  that  of  a 
life  consisting  in  a comparatively  passive  recipiency  of  divine 
grace. 

3.  In  perfect  consonance  with  the  scheme,  and  as  its  logical 
outcome,  all  that  implies  imperfection,  the  conflict  between  the 
flesh  and  spirit,  penitential  confession  and  humiliation  for  pres- 
ent spiritual  faults  and  shortcomings,  are  unwelcome  to  these 
people.  Mr.  See,  in  his  Rest  of  Faith,  gives  vent  to  these  feel- 


418 


The  Higher  Life 


[July, 


ings  in  an  introductory  chapter,  in  which  he. maintains  that  the 
“ church  is  not  a hospital,”  i.e.,  for  the  cure  of  enfeebled  or 
the  strengthening  of  imperfect  Christians.  He  represents,  in  a 
condemnatory  tone,  that  “ the  churches  through  the  land  are 
only  infirmaries  where  people  come  to  be  treated  by  the  Great 
Physician,  who  proceeds  to  cure  people  by  a slow  process,  in 
the  meantime  leaving  them  to  the  oversight  of  these  sick  minis- 
tering nurses.”  He  warns  (p.  179)  against  being  entangled  in  a 
“ seventh  of  Romans  difficulty  ‘ and  a Galatian  snare,’  which  in 
our  journey  we  do  well  to  keep  in  the  distance  by  simple 
faith.”  He  would  banish  from  the  worship  of  the  church 
“ hymns  that  hurt,”  among  which  he  classes  those  that  voice 
the  Christian’s  penitential  confession  ; specifying  explicitly 
those  beginning : 

“Come,  Holy  Spirit,  heavenly  Dove.” 

“ O for  a closer  walk  with  God.” 

“ Come,  thou  fount  of  every  blessing.” 

“ Thus  far  my  God  hath  led  me  on.” 

Comment  is  needless. 

4.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  while  many  persons  of  sweet  and 
unpretending  spirit  are  allured  into  these  Higher  Life  circles 
for  reasons  already  stated,  the  system  tends  to  nourish  a spirit 
of  Pharisaism  and  uncharitableness.  It  does  so,  as  its  profess- 
ors assume  a superiority  to  ordinary  Christians ; they  are  per- 
fect, while  the  church  as  a whole  is  imperfect,  or  if  not  this, 
they  are  leading  a higher  Christian  life  than  the  average. 
Many  of  their  adherents  assume,  what  most  of  their  arguments 
imply,  that  those  not  entirely  sanctified  are  not  regenerated, 
and,  therefore,  if  professing  Christians,  are  hypocrites.  The 
very  gathering  into  separate  meetings,  called  “ holiness  meet- 
ings,” or  “ higher  life  meetings,”  is  an  assumption  of  superior- 
ity— nay,  it  implies  that  the  ordinary  meetings  and  services  of 
the  church  are  not  thus  in  the  interest  of  holiness,  which  is  to 
impeach  their  Christian  character.  This  spirit  says  literally, 

“ Stand  by,  for  I am  holier  than  thou.”  It  cannot,  as  a whole, 
and  exceptions  aside,  be  otherwise  than  divisive,  denunciatory 
and  censorious.  What  the  ultimate  issue  of  all  this  must  be, 
that  on  the  whole  it  must  be  disastrous  to  religion,  all  history 
and  reason  prove. 

5.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Antinomian  feature  of  this 
system  has  strong  logical  and  practical  affinities  for  licentious- 


1877-] 


and  Christian  Perfection. 


419 


ness : men  who  esteem  themselves  perfect  are  apt  to  make 
themselves,  their  own  subjective  exercises,  experiences,  judg- 
ments, desires,  and  appetites,  the  measure  and  standard  of  per- 
fection ; to  make  these  the  rule  and  measure  of  rectitude,  rather 
than  God’s  word  ; or  rather  to  construe  them  as  God’s  voice 
and  word,  speaking  in  and  through  them.  They  have  often 
maintained  that  as  Christ  was  living  within  them,  their  desires, 
and  words  and  deeds  were  Christ’s.  This,  of  course,  is  the  ex- 
treme of  fanatical  and  blasphemous  Antinomian  pride  and 
licentiousness.  It  goes  to  seed  in  Onedia  communities.  Mr. 
Finney  says  (Autobiography,  p.  341)  that  about  the  time  he 
commenced  preaching  on  perfection,  it  came  to  be  agitated,  in 
the  Antinomian  sense  of  the  term,  a good  deal  at  New  Haven, 
at  Albany,  and  somewhat  in  New  York  City,  and  that  he 
could  not  accept  these  views.  History  shows  their  melancholy 
course  and  results.  But  there  are  other  and  higher  forms  of 
making  our  subjective  feeling  the  standard  of  truth  and  holi- 
ness besides  the  gross  and  low  form  above  noted.  It  often  de- 
velops in  simple  mysticism,  in  which  the  feeling  of  the  subject, 
devout  and  elevated  though  it  be,  still  becomes  a law  unto 
itself,  and  sets  its  own  impulses  and  bewilderments  above  the 
law  and  the  testimony.  Against  all  this  we  cannot  too  sedu- 
lously guard.  Nor  do  we  think  it  wrong  or  uncharitable  in 
this  connection  to  refer  to  the  career  of  Mr.  Pearsall  Smith, 
who  has  been  so  conspicuous  in  Higher  Life  leadership. 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


420 


Art.  II.— THE  GREAT  MESSIANIC  PROPHECY. 

By  Wolcott  Calkins,  D.  D.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

“Of  whom  speaketh  the  prophet  ?”  was  the  pertinent  ques- 
tion of  the  Ethiopian  Treasurer  concerning  the  most  remark- 
able prediction  ever  recorded.  Never  was  the  question  more 
urgent  than  now.  We  get  disquieted  by  doubts  about  the 
Bible  and  the  certainty  of  our  Christian  hopes,  because  we 
permit  ourselves  to  be  diverted  by  trivial  and  irrelevant  objec- 
tions from  resolute  investigation  of  truths  which  are  decisive. 
Such  a truth  is  before  us,  and  it  demands  thorough  and 
dispassionate  research. 

In  the  sublime  description  of  the  sufferings  and  triumphs  of 
Jehovah’s  Servant,  which  the  Ethiopian  was  reading,  three  por- 
tions are  distinguished  by  the  form  of  the  address.  In  the 
first,  the  speaker  is  Jehovah  himself,  who  discloses  in  outline 
the  exaltation  of  his  servant,  after  unexampled  humiliation. 
In  the  second,  the  prophet  enumerates  these  sufferings  in 
detail,  and  closes  with  assurances  of  his  final  triumph.  In  the 
third,  Jehovah  confirms  these  assurances  and  closes  the  pre- 
diction as  it  began,  with  the  sure  word  of  God,  that  through 
sorrow  and  death  his  Servant  shall  prosper,  and  be  exalted 
above  all  majesty  and  power. 

I.  Behold,  my  Servant  shall  prosper, 

He  shall  rise  up,  and  be  extolled,  and  stand  triumphantly  exalted. 

Even  as  many  were  shocked  at  him 

(His  countenance  was  so  marred  as  to  be  no  more  that  of  a man, 

His  form  no  more  that  of  sons  of  men  !) 

So  also  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations. 

The  kings  shall  shut  their  mouths  before  him; 

For  what  had  not  been  told  them  they  shall  see, 

And  what  they  had  never  heard  they  shall  consider.* 

II.  Who  hath  believed  our  report  ? 

And  to  whom  is  Jehovah’s  arm  revealed  ? 

For  he  shall  grow  up  berore  Him  as  a tender  plant, 

And  as  a sprout  out  of  dry  ground. 

He  hath  no  form  nor  comeliness  that  we  should  look  up  to  him, 

No  beauty  that  we  should  take  pleasure  in  him. 

He  is  despised  and  rejected  of  men, 

A man  of  sorrows,  well  acquainted  with  sickness  ; 


*Isa.  lii  .-13-15. 


1877-] 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


421 


And  like  one  hiding  his  face  before  us, 

He  was  despised  and  we  esteemed  him  not. 

And  yet  it  was  our  own  sickness  that  he  bore, 

And  our  sorrows  that  he  loaded  upon  himself. 

But  we  supposed  he  was  punished, 

Smitten  of  God,  and  tormented  ! 

O,  no  ! He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions, 

Bruised  for  our  iniquities. 

Chastisement  for  our  peace  was  upon  him, 

And  with  his  stripes  we  are  made  whole. 

All  we  like  sheep  have  gone  astray, 

We  have  turned  every  one  to  his  own  way. 

And  Jehovah  made  the  guilt  of  us  all  to  meet  upon  him. 

He  was  oppressed,  and  yet  he  humbled  himself; 

And  he  opened  not  his  mouth  like  a lamb  that  is  brought  to  the  slaughter, 
And  as  a sheep  is  dumb  before  her  shearers, 

So  he  opened  not  his  mouth. 

He  was  dragged  to  punishment  by  violence,  and  yet  by  process  of  law  ; 
And  who  of  the  men  of  his  generation  took  it  to  heart 
That  he  was  cut  off  from  the  land  of  the  living, 

That  the  stroke  for  my  people’s  transgressions  fell  upon  him  ! 

They  appointed  him  his  grave  with  criminals 
(Still  he  was  with  a rich  man  in  his  death  !) 

Although  he  had  done  no  wrong, 

Neither  was  any  deceit  in  his  mouth. 

And  yet  it  pleased  Jehovah  to  bruise  him. 

He  laid  sickness  upon  him. 

But  when  he  has  made  over  his  soul  as  a sin-offering, 

He  shall  see  offspring;  he  shall  prolong  his  days, 

And  the  pleasure  of  Jehovah  shall  prosper  in  his  hands  !* 

III. — Free  from  the  travail  of  his  soul, 

He  shall  see  and  be  satisfied. 

By  his  knowledge  shall  my  righteous  servant  make  many  righteous. 
Because  he  shall  bear  their  iniquities. 

Therefore  will  I give  him  the  great  as  a portion, 

And  he  shall  distribute  the  strong  as  spoil. 

For  he  hath  poured  out  his  soul  unto  death, 

And  he  was  numbered  with  transgressors, 

While  he  was  bearing  the  sin  of  many 

And  was  making  intercession  for  the  transgressors  !f 

Of  whom  speaketh  the  Prophet  thus?  Only  one  answer  has 
ever  been  derived  from  the  simple  reading  of  the  words,  with- 
out a previous  theory.  Jewish  writers  were  almost  unanimous 
that  this  was  a Messianic  prophecy  until  the  Christian  apolo- 


* Isa.  liii:  1-10. 

(New  Series,  No.  22.) 


f Isa.  liii : 1 1-12. 
27 


422 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


gists  made  the  admission  fatal  to  them.  And  modern  rational- 
ism did  not  discover,  until  late  in  the  last  century,  that  if  this 
prediction  refers  to  a person  who  appeared  in  history  hundreds 
of  years  after  it  was  made,  it  is  a miracle  which  makes  all  the 
miracles  of  the  New  Testament  credible.  What  answer,  then, 
have  Jews  and  rationalists  made  to  this  question  which  they 
cannot  evade — Of  whom  speaketh  the  prophet  ? 

“ Of  the  whole  Jewish  people.  In  the  first  part  Jehovah 
applies  to  his  chosen  people  the  well-known  name — my  servant, 
and  contrasts  their  present  misery  with  their  future  glory. 
In  the  second  part  the  heathen  confess  their  sins,  and  look  to 
Israel  as  their  Saviour.  In  the  third  part  the  Lord  assures 
them  that  their  sins  have  been  pardoned  through  the  interces- 
sions of  his  anointed  people.” 

This  was  the  first  attempt  of  Jewish  writers  to  escape  the 
Messianic  interpretation.*  The  theory  has  been  embraced  by 
many  of  the  ablest  modern  rationalists, f some  of  whom  seek 
to  evade  its  gravest  difficulties  by  applying  the  description  to 
the  ideal  Israel  whom  God  called  out  of  Egypt  and  purposed 
to  establish  in  the  Holy  Land,  not  to  the  actual  Israel  of  the 
exile. J:  The  latter  hypothesis  encounters  more  embarrassment 

than  it  escapes,  for  it  leaves  no  place  for  the  sufferings  of  the 
exile,  which  are  said  to  inspire  the  whole  description. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  dwell  upon  the  contradictions  involved 
in  this  conjecture.  Our  prophet  carefully  distinguishes  the 
people  from  the  servant  of  the  Lord:  “Ye  are  my  witnesses, 
and  my  servant  whom  I have  chosen. Ӥ  The  two  are  wholly 
different  in  character.  Israel  is  blind,  deaf,  stiff-necked, 
treacherous;!  the  servant  innocent  and  guileless.^  Israel  is 
never  described  as  the  redeemer  of  the  heathen.  On  the  con- 
trary, Egypt,  Ethiopia,  and  Seba  are  given  for  a ransom  of 
Israel.**  The  servant  of  the  Lord  is  afflicted,  not  for  his  own 
sins,  but  for  transgressors.  But  who  gave  Jacob  for  a spoil, 
and  Israel  to  the  robbers?  The  Lord,  for  they  would  not  walk 
in  his  ways,  neither  were  they  obedient  to  His  law. ft  Of  this 
rebellious  people  it  could  never  have  been  said — 


* Abenezra,  Kimchi,  Abarbanel. 
f Rosenmiiller,  Hitzig,  Koster. 

J Ewald,  Beck, 
g Is.  xliii : io. 


| xliii  : 8;  xlviii : 4-8. 
*[  liii  : 1 1. 

**  xliii:  3. 

t f xlii : 24;  lxiii : 10. 


1877-] 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


423 


“ It  pleased  the  Lord  to  bruise  him, 

Although  he  had  done  no  wrong, 

Neither  was  guile  found  in  his  mouth.  ” 

Of  whom  speaketh  the  prophet  ? “ Of  the  obedient  portion  of 
the  people  in  contrast  with  the  idolatrous ; the  collective  body 
of  the  prophets;*  the  faithful  exiles  ;f  those  only  of  the  faith- 
ful whose  true  piety  made  them  zealous  to  return  to  their 
homes,  especially  patriotic  elders,  priests,  Levites  and  proph- 
ets.^; Some  class  of  the  Jewish  people,  more  or  less  extended, 
is  described  as  suffering  oppression,  and  often  martyrdom 
itself;  the  disobedient  at  length  confess  that  their  own  sins 
have  involved  their  innocent  brethren  in  calamity  ; and  restored 
to  repentance  and  fidelity  by  this  means,  they  are  pardoned 
by  their  God  for  the  sake  of  His  servant.” 

In  some  form  this  is  the  theory  of  the  ablest  scholars  who 
now  reject  the  Messianic  interpretation.  But  they  all  fail  to 
find  a class  of  men  who  bear  any  resemblance  to  the  descrip- 
tion. There  is  no  such  exceptional  class  among  the  people. 
“ We  are  all  as  an  unclean  thing;  all  our  righteousnesses  are  as 
filthy  rags;  there  is  none  that  calleth  upon  thy  name.Ӥ  The 
grammatical  construction  forces  these  writers  themselves  to 
make  the  prophet  the  speaker  in  the  second  part.  He  con- 
fesses his  own  sins,  and  at  the  same  time  belongs  to  the  class 
who  are  suffering  innocently  for  the  sins  of  others  ! 

These  sufferings  are  also  wholly  voluntary.  “ He  bore  our 
sickness;  he  loaded  our  sorrows  upon  himself.”||  “ He  made 
over  his  own  soul  as  a sin-offering. ”^[  But  the  faithful  exiles 
endured  only  what  they  could  not  escape.  He  was  patient. 
“ He  opened  not  his  mouth.”  The  mouths  of  the  exiles  were 
always  open— “ By  the  rivers  of  Babylon,  there  we  sat  down  ; 
yea,  we  wept  when  we  remembered  Zion.”**  The  sweetest 
lyrics  of  the  most  poetic  nation  in  history  are  elegies  of  sorrow, 
and  dirges  of  bereavement.  And  why  does  this  immortal  song 
of  the  exiles  glide  so  naturally  into  bloodthirsty  cursings  of 
enemies  ? 

“ O daughter  of  Babylon! 

Blessed  shall  be  he  that  taketh  and  dasheth 
Thy  little  ones  against  the  stones  !” 

* De  Wette,  Gesenius,  Winer.  ||  liii  : 4. 

t Thenius,  Paulus,  Maurer.  Tf  liii:  10.  Both  lost  in  the  authorized  version,. 

J Knobel.  **  Ps.  137:  1. 

§Isa  lxiv:  6. 


424  The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy.  [ J uly , 

What  mean  the  fearful  execrations  of  many  of  the  Psalms  ? 

“ Let  his  days  be  few,  and  let  another  take  his  office  ; 

Let  his  children  be  fatherless,  and  his  wife  a widow  ; 

Let  his  children  be  continually  vagabonds,  and  beg ! ”* 

What  mean  the  eulogies  of  treachery,  and  of  hospitality 
desecrated  by  perjury  and  assassination  ? 

“ Blessed  be  Jael  above  women  ! 

She  stretched  out  her  hand  to  the  tent  pin, 

And  her  right  hand  to  the  hammer  of  the  workmen. 

She  hammered  Sisera,  she  smote  his  head ; 

She  beat  him,  she  struck  through  his  temples  ; 

Between  her  feet  he  bowed,  he  fell,  he  lay  ; 

Where  he  bowed,  there  he  fell  down  slaughtered  ! 

So  perish  all  thine  enemies,  O Jehovah  ! ”f 

It  is  no  part  of  our  purpose  to  propose  any  theory  of  these 
frightful  utterances  of  vindictive  passion  which  abound  in  Jew- 
ish prophecy  and  poetry.  All  theories  admit  this  one  fact, 
that  they  are  true  and  imperishable  records  of  human  opinion. 
Like  the  pillar  of  salt  overlooking  the  plains  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah,  these  bleak,  rugged  shafts  of  vengeance  stand  sen- 
tinels by  the  shores  of  the  buried  past,  defending  from  doubt 
the  deep  resentment  of  the  human  mind,  and  pre-eminently  of 
the  Jewish  mind,  for  oppression.  From  this  natural  infirmity 
no  Israelite  was  exempt.  David,  the  sweet  Psalmist  of  Zion, 
was  the  most  fervent  curser  of  them  all.  Jeremiah  never  sup- 
presses his  sobs  but  to  breathe  out  vengeance.  Isaiah  exhausts 
ridicule  and  malediction  upon  his  idolatrous  foes.  Where  in 
all  the  wide  wanderings  of  these  kinsmen  of  the  fierce  Bedouin, 
who  never  forgives;  where  in  the  eventful  history  of  this 
strange  people,  whom  hatred  for  others  has  held  together  when 
love  for  one  another  had  lost  its  cohesive  power,  are  we  to 
look  for  a class  of  men  who  humble  themselves  when  they  are 
oppressed,  who  open  not  the  mouth  when  they  are  led  like 
sheep  to  the  shearers,  like  lambs  to  the  slaughter  ? This 
theory  of  a righteous  and  submissive  class  of  sufferers  in 
Israel  is  one  of  the  perversions  of  history  which  nothing  but 
the  credulity  of  modern  rationalism  can  tolerate. 

But,  after  all,  we  might  have  dismissed  both  these  theories 
summarily,  by  remarking  what  is  evident  to  the  Ethiopian, 


Ps.  109:  8-10. 


f Jndges  v : 24-27. 


1877.] 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


425 

and  to  every  candid  reader  who  has  no  a priori  theory,  that 
the  prophet  is  not  speaking  of  a collective  class  at  all,  but  of 
an  individual.  He  has  the  countenance  and  form  of  a man. 
His  growth,  his  life,  his  death,  his  burial,  are  described  circum- 
stantially. It  is  within  the  range  of  poetic  license  to  portray 
the  vicissitudes  of  national  calamity  under  the  figure  of  an  in- 
jured person  ; and  possibly  to  speak  of  their  destruction  as 
the  grave  of  the  buried  nation.  But  such  precise  and  vivid 
representations  as  these,  applied  to  so  vague  a subject,  would 
be  offensive  in  any  poet,  intolerable  in  any  prophet.  Of  whom 
speaketh  the  prophet?  Of  himself  or  of  some  other  man? 
The  question  has  been  evaded,  not  answered,  by  nearly  all 
who  have  written  in  the  interests  of  unbelief. 

Some,  however,  have  dared  to  answer:  “ He  is  speaking  of 

himself,*  of  King  Josiah,f  of  Jeremiah,;};  of  King  Uzziah,§  of 
King  Hezekiah,  of  an  unknown  prophet  slain  by  the  Jews  in 
exile,  of  Cyrus,  of  the  Maccabees,  of  some  unnamed  king  of 
Israel. 

It  is  a remarkable  fact  that  no  one  of  these  candidates  for 
canonization  in  the  calendar  of  unbelief  has  had  more  than  one 
advocate  at  a time.  Knobel  says  of  them  all  that  they  scarcely 
deserve  mention,  much  less  refutation.**  But  there  is  one  re- 
mark to  be  made  on  this  theory,  which  will  also  apply  to  the 
others,  that  is  too  important  to  be  omitted : On  this  or  any 
other  theory  of  modern  Jews  and  skeptics,  our  prophet  teaches 
the  doctrine  of  expiation  by  the  vicarious  suffering  of  a human 
victim. 

From  the  fortieth  chapter  to  the  close  of  the  book,  a two- 
fold deliverance  is  incessantly  proclaimed.  And,  like  the  pre- 
dictions of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  judgment 
day  in  Matthew,  the  two  are  not  always  clearly  distinguished, 
although  the  first  nine  chapters  refer  chiefly  to  the  deliverance 
from  Babylon,  the  rest  of  the  book  to  the  redemption  from  sin 
and  misery.  Each  of  these  great  blessings  shall  be  accom- 
plished by  a servant  of  Jehovah  ; the  former  by  Cyrus,  the  lat- 
ter by  the  servant  in  this  chapter.  Cyrus  shall  save  Israel  by 

* Standlin.  f Aberbanel,  as  an  alternati  j&.  % Rabbi  Saadias  Haggaon. 

J AugustL.  ||  Konynenburg  and  Bahrdt. 

If  Anonymous  writers  in  rationalistic  periodicals. 

**  Kurzgefasstes  Exegetisches  Handbuch,  Jesaia,  p.  387. 


426 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


his  courage,  by  his  power,  by  his  military  supremacy ; but  this 
servant  by  his  meekness,  his  submission,  his  suffering,  his 
death  and  burial.  Nor  are  his  sufferings  merely  preliminary  tc* 
his  work.  They  do  the  work.  This  is  disclosed,  chiaro  oscura 
after  the  usual  prophetic  manner,  in  the  opening  announce- 
ment: “He  shall  sprinkle  many  nations.”  The  well-known 
word,  with  the  technical  meaning  of  sacrificial  worship,  to  sanc- 
tify the  unclean  by  sprinkling  on  them  the  blood  of  innocence, 
is  boldly  and  deliberately  chosen.  But  even  if  this  meaning 
is  rejected,*  the  following  descriptions  are  so  precise  that  ration- 
alism has  made  no  attempt  to  evade  them.f 

These  words  can  bear  but  one  meaning.  Guilt,  and  suffering 
for  guilt,  were  taken  off  from  transgressors  and  borne  by  their 
innocent  substitute.  He  expiated  their  sins  by  his  atoning 
death.  Men  may  say  that  this  is  only  figuratively  true,  and 
describes  no  real  transaction.  They  make  no  attempt  to  deny 
that  the  prophet  believes  and  affirms  that  sinners  are  saved  by 
the  sacrifice  of  this  victim. 

Now,  what  if  this  servant  of  the  Lord  is  Isaiah,  or  Jeremiah, 
or  any  other  martyr  of  Israel — or,  for  that  matter,  any  collect- 
ive class  of  good  men?  Then  human  guilt  is  expiated  by  the 
death  of  a human  victim  ! And  no  trace  of  such  a doctrine  can 
be  found  elsewhere  in  the  Bible.  When  it  is  said  that  God  will 
give  Seba,  Egypt  and  Ethiopia  as  a ransom, % or  that  the  evil- 
doer is  a ransom  for  the  righteous,  and  the  ungodly  for  the 
pious, § this  figurative  sense  of  ransom  has  nothing  in  common 
with  the  expiation  of  guilt  by  the  substitution  of  an  innocent 
victim.  Prophecy  knows  nothing  of  the  atonement  of  guilt  by 
human  suffering. 

Or  rather  the  Scriptures  know  and  reject  with  horror  this 
refuge  of  guilty  despair.  It  prevailed  in  every  nation  surround- 
ing Israel.  It  prevailed  in  Greece,  and  Rome,  and  ancient 
Mexico.  It  prevails  still  in  savage  Africa.  And  once  God  did 
tempt  Abraham,  for  this  among  other  purposes,  to  fix  in  the 
minds  of  all  his  descendants  a horror  of  human  immolation,  and 
make  it  forever  impossible  for  them  to  believe  that  he  could 
command  them  to  make  their  children  pass  through  the  fire 


* Gesenius,  De  Wette,  Knobel. 
f See  our  version  of  liii:  4,  5,  6,1012 


f Is.  xliii : 3. 

§ Prov.  xxi  : 18. 


1 877.]  The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy.  427 

as  did  the  Moabites  ; or  to  bleed  on  the  altars  in  high  places, 
as  in  the  cruel  rites  of  the  Canaanites  and  Philistines.  It  is 
the  gloomy  and  venal  prophet  of  the  fire-god  of  the  far  East 
who  puts  the  startling  question  : “Wherewith  shall  I come  be- 
fore Jehovah?  Shall  I give  my  first-born  for  my  transgres- 
sion— the  fruit  of  my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul  ? ” * The 
horrid  conjecture  makes  the  prophet  of  Israel  shudder.  It  was 
the  one  indestructible  conviction  of  the  national  mind,  engen- 
dered by  the  selection  of  the  kid,  the  most  insignificant  of  their 
spotless  victims,  for  their  sin-offering,  that  Jehovah  reserved  in 
his  own  hands  the  provision  of  atonement  for  sin  ; that  man 
could  not  furnish  the  victim  ; and,  above  all,  that  the  intrusion 
of  a human  victim  was  something  immeasurably  worse  than 
murder;  it  was  sacrilege  and  blasphemy  against  the  author 
and  defender  of  human  life. 

And  here  we  have  reached  at  a bound  a momentous  conclu- 
sion concerning  our  prophecy.  That  this  servant  of  Jehovah 
could  be  any  martyr,  or  any  class  of  righteous  sufferers,  is  a 
conception  which  no  true  Israelite  could  entertain.  Nothing 
marks  so  painfully  the  degradation  of  modern  Israel  as  the  ad- 
mission of  this  heathenish  idea.  But  this  is  not  all.  This 
sprinkler  of  the  nations  ; this  sin-bearer  for  all  the  people  ; this 
mysterious  being  who  takes  away  sin  by  making  his  own  life 
a sin-offering,  cannot  be  a man  at  all ! That  is,  he  cannot  be- 
long to  the  sinful  race  he  redeems.  The  prophet  must  have 
in  his  mind  a servant  of  Jehovah  who  comes  down  from  heaven, 
not  up  from  sinful  earth.  This  is  the  thought  which  links  the 
present  indissolubly  with  the  former  description  : 

“ They  shall  call  his  name  God-with-us  !”f 
“ The  government  shall  be  upon  his  shoulders, 

And  his  name  shall  be  called 
Wonderful,  Counsellor,  the  mighty  God, 

The  everlasting  Father,  the  Prince  of  Peace.  ”t 

Of  whom  speaketh  the  prophet  this  ? Of  the  Messiah  of 
God.  Of  the  divine  Redeemer  provided  from  heaven  to  sprin- 
kle the  sinful  nations  of  the  earth.  Of  the  Lamb  of  God  that 
taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world.  All  other  theories  involve 
hopeless  contradictions.  This  alone  leaves  the  impress  of 
truth. 


* Mic.  vi  : 6. 


f Is.  vii : 14. 


t Is.  ix  : 6. 


428 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


But  the  Ethiopian  meant  more  than  this  by  his  question. 
Has  this  prediction  been  fulfilled  ? All  attempts  to  find  in 
any  possible  development  from  our  sinful  race  the  original  of 
this  clearly  defined  and  heavenly  portrait  have  been  self-con- 
tradictory and  vain.  But  has  one  come  down  from  heaven, 
stood  upon  the  earth,  and  been  recognized  as  the  substance  of 
this  photographic  shadow  thrown  forward  upon  the  sensitive 
page  of  prophecy  ? 

It  is  a relief  to  observe  that  Doderlein’s  theory  of  the  later 
composition  of  this  part  of  Isaiah,  from  the  fortieth  chapter  to 
the  close,  is  no  embarrassment  to  the  discussion  of  this  ques- 
tion. It  is  admitted  by  all  that  if  the  prediction  be  Messianic, 
it  wras  not  fulfilled  until  hundreds  of  years  after  the  exile. 
The  few  Jewish  scholars  who  hold  it  to  be  Messianic  are  look- 
ing for  its  fulfillment  still.  It  was  absolutely  necessary  for 
those  who  denied  the  possibility  of  miracles  to  invent  this  the- 
ory, that  an  unknown  prophet  of  the  exile  added  to  Isaiah’s 
work  the  marvelous  disclosures  of  Israel’s  two-fold  deliverance 
from  Babylon  and  from  the  guilt  of  sin,  after  the  former  had 
been  accomplished.  But  the  latter  was  not  accomplished  by 
the  return  from  captivity.  Nothing  at  all  resembling  these  de- 
scriptions occurred  for  many  centuries  after  the  latest  date  as- 
signed by  destructive  criticism  to  their  publication.  To  our 
argument  it  is  a matter  of  complete  indifference  whether 
Isaiah  or  some  other  prophet  wrote  this  chapter  ; whether  it 
was  written  eight  hundred  or  only  six  hundred  years  before 
its  fulfilment. 

For  it  has  been  fulfilled  to  the  letter!  This  is  the  startling 
fact  which  we  have  still  to  point  out.  On  any  hypothesis  of 
the  date  of  the  work  before  us,  we  are  in  the  presence  of  an  in- 
contestable miracle.  Let  us  try  to  get  some  adequate  impres- 
sion of  it.  Go  back  in  the  centuries,  not  eight  hundred  years, 
as  we  might,  but  the  six  hundred  years  conceded  to  this  proph- 
ecy by  unbelievers  themselves.  Six  hundred  years  ago  Eng- 
land was  beginning  the  struggle  for  civil  liberty ; the  Mag- 
na Charta  had  just  vindicated  the  great  principle  of  Anglo- 
Saxon  legislation — no  taxation  without  representation  ; the 
first  regular  parliament  had  just  assembled.  Now,  what  if  in 
that  germinal  period  of  liberty  and  equality  before  the  law, 
more  than  two  hundred  years  before  the  discovery  of  America, 


1 8 77.]  The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy.  429 

some  renowned  reformer  had  made  and  recorded  the  pre- 
diction of  a terrible  struggle  to  extend  these  rights  of  man, 
not  alone  to  baron  and  freeholder,  but  to  workingmen  and 
slaves;  the  leader  on  the  side  of  emancipation  is  depicted  as  a 
tall,  awkward,  ungainly  man,  destitute  of  culture  or  refine- 
ment ; he  is  misunderstood,  suspected,  and  bitterly  opposed  ; 
against  all  this  hostility  he  steadfastly  persists  in  his  purpose, 
and  publishes  a proclamation  of  freedom  to  milli  ons  of  the  op- 
pressed ; at  last  he  is  put  to  death  by  the  hand  of  an  assassin  ; 
the  weapon  employed  is  described  as  one  entirely  unknown  at 
the  time  of  the  prediction  ; and  after  his  death,  the  cause  for 
which  he  sheds  his  blood  attains  the  most  signal  triumph. 

Would  it  be  possible  for  us  to  mistake  the  verification  of 
such  a prophecy  ? Would  it  be  possible  to  doubt  that  these 
words  were  inspired  by  the  omniscient  God,  to  whom  the  future 
is  ever  present?  Would  it  be  difficult  for  us  to  convince  an  in- 
telligent stranger  from  the  interior  of  China,  whom  we  might 
find  reading  it  with  wonder,  that  it  certainly  referred  to  Abra- 
ham Lincoln  ? Precisely  this  was  the  miracle  of  prophecy,  just  ful- 
filled to  the  letter,  which  gave  to  the  apostles  of  the  first  cen- 
tury their  irresistible  arguments.  The  Ethiopian  is  reading  a 
prediction  in  every  respect  as  exact  and  detailed  as  the  one 
supposed.  And  Philip  began  at  the  same  Scripture  and 
preached  unto  him  Jesus.  He  compared  unquestionable  facts, 
of  which  the  stranger  had  full  knowledge,  with  the  prophecy. 
He  demanded  the  surrender  of  reason  and  conscience  to  the 
certain  conclusion  from  this  coincidence  that  this  was  the  work 
of  God  for  the  salvation  of  men.  The  same  facts  are  before  us. 
Let  us  make  the  same  comparison,  and  yield  the  same  homage 
to  divine  truth. 

The  descriptions  of  the  Messiah’s  origin  among  men  and 
personal  appearance  deserve  our  first  consideration.  The 
marring  of  his  form  and  countenance  so  that  men  were  shocked 
at  him  and  despised  him,  refer  to  his  violent  death.  But  it 
appears  that  he  grew  up  from  childhood  in  a family  that  had 
fallen  into  utter  obscurity,  like  a sprout  out  of  dry  ground,  and 
that  he  had  no  form  nor  comeliness  that  men  should  look  up  to 
him;  no  beauty  that  they  should  take  pleasure  in  him.  These 
words  must  refer  to  his  humble  origin,  and  insignificant  appear- 
ance among  men.  And  such  a picture  could  never  have  been 


430 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


drawn  at  random  by  human  ingenuity.  It  is  true  the  Jews 
were  the  most  democratic  people  on  earth.  They  loved  to 
think  of  their  first  victorious  king,  coming  to  his  encounter  with 
the  uncircumcised  giant,  armed  with  nothing  but  the  shep- 
herd’s sling.  But  the  lowly  origin  of  the  peasant  boy  was  fully 
compensated  by  his  manly  beauty,  his  magnificent  strength,  and 
his  impetuous  courage.  The  descendants  of  Samson,  of  Saul, 
of  David  and  of  Judas  Maccabaeus,  could  never  conceive  of  a 
king  of  Israel  with  neither  form  nor  comeliness. 

The  prophet  foresees  that  this  description  will  be  incredible 
— Who  hath  believed  our  report?  Nor  is  it  incredible  to  Jews 
alone.  The  history  of  its  fulfilment  has  proved  incredible  to 
the  Christian  world.  We  have  in  Christian  art  an  undesigned 
but  marvelous  verification  of  this  prophecy.  Whence  have 
painters  and  sculptors  derived  that  form  of  majesty  and  face 
combining  the  tenderness  of  woman,  the  strength  of  manhood, 
and  the  divinity  of  the  Son  of  God,  which  rises  before  us  in 
such  masterpieces  as  the  Ecce  Homo  ? They  are  pure  fancies. 
They  are  the  fancies  which  artistic  minds  must  form  of  God 
incarnate.  But  they  are  certainly  false.  In  pictures  of  the 
transfiguration,  or  of  the  ascension,  they  may  be  possible  con- 
jectures. As  representations  of  Christ  in  his  humiliation,  they 
are  exactly  contradictory  to  the  facts.  We  know  nothing  of 
what  his  appearance  was ; we  know  it  was  not  what  art  rep- 
resents. Such  a man  could  not  appear  anywhere,  in  any 
period  of  history,  without  attracting  general  attention.  But 
there  was  nothing  in  Jesus’  form  or  features  to  cause  any 
one  to  turn  and  look  at  him  a second  time.  John  was  on  the 
lookout  for  the  Messiah,  but  had  never  heard  of  this  cousin  of 
his  as  a remarkable  man,  and  “knew  him  not”  until  the  miracu- 
lous sign  was  given  him.  It  took  a miracle  to  call  the  apostles 
to  follow  him.  His  brothers  could  not  be  convinced  by  any 
miracle  but  the  last.  The  great  multitude,  led  by  imagination 
more  than  by  reason,  were  fascinated  by  the  miracles,  but 
soon  offended  by  his  humble  appearance.  Few  will  believe  it 
even  now ; our  readers  will  probably  be  shocked  that  their 
Saviour  is  described  in  such  commonplace  language.  But  the 
fact  is  incontestable.  The  Servant  of  Jehovah  had  no  form 
nor  comeliness  that  men  should  look  up  to  him,  no  beauty  that 
they  should  desire  him. 


1 877.]  The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy . 431 

The  Messiah  was  also  to  be  the  greatest  sufferer  in  the 
world.  He  is  a man  of  sorrows  and  acquainted  with  grief. 
He  is  despised,  rejected,  bruised,  smitten  with  stripes  and  put 
to  a cruel  death.  Who  hath  believed  our  report?  For  this  is 
not  the  prediction  of  one  prophet  alone.  Centuries  before, 
David  had  described  these  sufferings  of  the  Messiah  in  no  less 
startling  language.  He  was  to  become  a worm,  and  no  longer 
a man;  he  was  to  be  surrounded  by  gaping  multitudes  scoffing 
at  his  anguish;  he  was  to  cry  out  in  momentary  despair,  “My 
God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou  forsaken  me!*  The  prophet  ex- 
claims, in  behalf  of  himself  and  of  all  who  had  foretold  these 
sufferings — Who  hath  believed  our  report ! Through  the  cap- 
tivity, after  the  expiration  of  prophecy,  during  the  dark  ages  of 
Syrian,  Macedonian  and  Roman  oppression,  under  the  Macca- 
bees, under  Hillel,  to  the  final  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and 
dismemberment  of  the  nation,  the  Jews  preserved  faith  and 
hope  in  their  Messiah,  but  they  never  expected  a suffering 
Messiah.  With  the  insignificant  exception  of  the  old  prophets, 
of  John  the  Baptist,  who  was  looking  for  the  Lamb  of  God  to 
take  away  the  sins  of  the  world,  and  of  a few  other  men  and 
women  of  exceptional  penetration,  these  unequivocal  predic- 
tions of  the  Messiah’s  extreme  sufferings  were  completely  for- 
gotten or  else  resolutely  rejected.  Their  fulfillment  to  the 
letter  failed  to  bring  them  back  to  recollection  and  to  faith. 
Masters  of  Israel,  readers  and  teachers  of  Psalms  and  prophets, 
stood  by  the  cross  and  proposed  this  test  of  his  Messiahship: 
“If  he  be  the  King  of  Israel,  let  him  now  come  down  from  the 
cross  and  we  will  believe  on  him.  He  trusted  in  God;  let  him 
deliver  him  now  if  he  will  save  him.”f  He  was  not  only  endur- 
ing the  very  sufferings  foretold  of  the  Messiah,  but  these  exact 
words  of  theirs  are  unwittingly  repeated  from  the  twenty- 
second  Psalm,  and  yet  they  never  take  it  to  heart.  To  the 
last  they  reason  against  the  Scriptures  they  profess  to  revere. 

The  apostles  were  no  less  blind  and  slow  of  heart  to  believe. 
They  kept  echoing  the  one  immovable  conviction  of  the 
national  mind:  “We  have  heard  out  of  the  law  that  the  Mes- 
siah abideth  forever;  how  sayest  thou  that  the  Son  of  Man 
must  be  lifted  up  ?”J  Near  the  close  of  his  life,  he  told  them 


* Psalm  xxii. 


f Mt.  xxvii : 42. 


f John  xii : 34. 


432 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


plainly  of  his  impending  sufferings,  of  the  manner  of  his  death, 
and  how  long  he  would  lie  in  the  grave.  They  understood 
none  of  these  things.  Peter  took  him  and  rebuked  him.  This 
complete  ignorance  and  confirmed  unbelief  in  his  own  times 
is  a miraculous  fulfillment  of  one  portion  of  our  prophecy  which 
is  wholly  lost  in  the  English  version. 

“ Who  of  the  men  of  his  generation  took  it  to  heart 
That  he  was  cut  off  from  the  land  of  the  living, 

That  the  stroke  for  my  people’s  transgressions  fell  upon  him!”* 

It  is  no  wonder  that  such  predictions  are  discredited  when 
they  are  made.  But  even  when  they  are  fulfilled  to  the  letter, 
and  the  blow  falls  which  cuts  off  from  life  the  Redeemer,  and 
saves  the  redeemed  from  death,  the  eye-witnesses  of  the  event 
fail  to  take  it  to  heart. 

To  the  thoughtful  mind  these  disclosures  of  the  public 
opinion  of  ages  far  in  the  future,  and  the  exact  verification  of 
them  in  history,  are  proofs  that  prophecy  is  miraculous  and 
Jesus  is  the  Messiah,  more  decisive  than  coincidences  of  facts 
in  detail,  with  their  prediction.  And  yet  the  latter  are  con- 
vincing enough.  Some  of  these  may  be  briefly  enumerated  : 

The  prophets  foresee  a form  of  suffering  which  is  absolutely 
unknown  to  Jewish  law  and  custom.  All  the  nations  of  an- 
tiquity except  the  Jews  were  accustomed  to  put  condemned 
persons  to  death  by  torture.  A morbid  ingenuity  was  ex- 
hausted to  prolong  human  suffering.  The  Philistines  burned 
their  prisoners  alive. t The  awful  picture  of  the  mother  com- 
pelled to  see  her  seven  sons  dismembered  and  burned  piece- 
meal by  their  heathen  tyrant,  is  undoubtedly  painted  from  the 
life.:}:  The  Greeks  reserved  for  the  execution  of  their  own  cit- 

izens a painless  but  fatal  narcotic.  But  barbarians  and  slaves 
were  tortured.  Socrates  is  described  by  Plato  as  defending  a 
man  for  binding  one  of  his  slaves  in  chains,  and  leaving  him  to 
die  of  hunger  and  thirst.  Demosthenes  boasts  that  he  once 
caused  a wretch  to  be  flayed  alive.  There  is  no  improbability 
in  these  stories.  The  most  cultivated  men  of  those  times  in- 
stinctively felt  that  torture  was  a necessary  ingredient  of  pun- 
ishment. The  instinct  survives  in  the  barbarous  execution  still 
practiced  in  England  and  America.  Christianity  is  not  yet 
powerful  enough  to  substitute  instant  death  by  painless  an- 


* Isa.  liii : 8. 


f Judges  xv  : 5. 


JMac. : vii. 


433 


1 877.]  The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy . 

aesthetics  for  slow  strangulation,  as  the  penalty  for  the  worst 
crimes. 

But  of  all  the  tortures  ever  sanctioned  by  law,  nothing  can 
compare  with  the  excruciating  punishment  employed  rarely 
by  Persians,  Egyptians,  Carthagenians  and  Macedonians,  but 
never  in  common  use  among  the  Orientals,  until  Rome  ex- 
tended her  conquests  to  the  Euphrates.  We  have  come  to 
venerate  the  cross.  Delicate  woman  wears  its  emblem  without 
a shudder.  We  must  divest  ourselves  of  this  feeling.  We 
must  ask  ourselves  what  it  would  be  fora  French  lady  to  fondle 
among  her  jewels  a model  of  the  guillotine  on  which  her  hus- 
band died,  or  for  us  to  erect  the  scaffold  of  death  as  the  most 
conspicuous  monument  of  our  cities.  We  can  thus  form  some 
idea  of  the  horror  which  the  cross  excited  in  the  days  of  the 
apostles.  It  was  one  of  the  most  familiar  objects  in  their 
country.  In  their  many  journeys,  they  had  often  come  upon 
the  executioners  at  their  savage  work.  They  had  heard  the 
despairing  cries  of  sufferers,  lingering  all  night  long  in  their 
anguish.  This  was  something  worse  than  heartless  cruelty — 
it  was  a gratuitous  outrage  to  the  merciful  institutions  in  which 
they  were  educated.  The  death  penalty  under  the  law  of 
Moses,  inflicted  alike  on  citizen  and  alien,  bond  and  free,  was 
rude  but  humane.  The  first  stone  cast,  often  destroyed  sensi- 
bility. Hanging  was  only  employed  after  death,  as  additional 
disgrace.  Suffering  by  torture  was  more  repugnant  to  their 
feelings  than  it  is  to  ours.  But  the  shameful,  inhuman  torture 
of  the  Roman  crucifixion,  the  torture  that  made  Caesar,  the 
man  of  blood,  faint  away  the  first  time  he  beheld  it;  the  tor- 
ture that  prolonged  life  and  intensified  anguish  in  extreme 
cases  for  twenty-four  hours — no  words  can  express  the  revulsion 
it  excited  in  the  soul  of  an  Israelite. 

And  yet  Israelites  foretold  this  punishment  centuries  before 
the  nation  that  brought  it  into  general  use  had  grown  to 
threatening  power.  Nay,  centuries  before  the  traditional  date 
of  the  founding  of  Rome,  Jewish  prophecy  exclaimed  : “ They 
pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet.”'"  The  details  of  our  present 
prophecy  are  less  precise  than  this,  and  the  words  of  Zecha- 
riah : “The  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  shall  look  upon  him 


Psalms  xxii  : 16. 


434 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


whom  they  have  pierced,  and  shall  mourn.”*  But  the  scourging 
by  stripes,  the  laceration  of  the  brow  with  thorns,  and  the 
shocking  abuse  of  his  suffering  body,  as  if  he  were  a beast  and 
no  more  a man,  are  fearful  descriptions  of  barbarities  unknown 
and  unsuspected  until  the  period  of  Roman  tyranny. 

But  there  are  three  combinations  peculiar  to  this  prediction, 
which  serve  to  fix  the  date  of  its  fulfilment  with  absolute  cer- 
tainty. The  English  version  renders  the  eighth  verse  : “ He  was 
taken  from  prison  and  from  judgment”  ; that  is,  a mob  snatched 
him  out  of  prison  and  put  him  to  death  without  a regular  trial. 
Nothing  of  the  kind  occurred  in  the  death  of  Jesus,  and  the 
prophet  says  nothing  of  the  kind.  All  authorities  are  now 
agreed  in  giving  this  as  the  exact  meaning  of  the  original : 
“ He  was  dragged  to  punishment  by  violence,  and  yet  under 
due  process  of  law.”  Now  how  could  such  a combination  of 
things  be  possible  ? Men  were  killed  by  mob  violence  in  Isaiah’s 
time.  The  innocent  suffered  under  process  of  law.  But  both 
forces  meeting — the  turbulence  of  a lawless  conspiracy,  the 
stern  requisitions  of  that  august  authority  which  always  defies 
such  anarchy — what  human  sagacity  forecasting  all  probabil- 
ities or  possibilities  could  have  stumbled  upon  such  a conjec- 
ture ? It  was  no  conjecture.  It  was  a divine  revelation  of  the 
one  tragic  period  in  the  national  history,  when  unprecedented 
freedom  reigned  in  strange  alliance  with  despotism.  The 
Messiah  was  dragged  to  punishment  by  violence.  The  infuri- 
ated mob  exhausted  their  cruelty  upon  the  unresisting  victim, 
as  if  the  old  times  had  come  back  again  when  every  man  did 
that  which  was  right  in  his  own  eyes.  But  all  was  done  under 
due  process  of  law.  The  Roman  legion  stood  by,  to  see  that 
every  requirement  of  criminal  law  was  rigidly  executed. 

Another  combination  of  two  things  apparently  conflicting 
is  still  more  remarkable.  It  appears  that  others  were  to  be 
executed  with  him  : “ he  was  numbered  with  transgressors.’’ 
It  would  naturally  follow  that  he  would  also  be  buried  with 
them.  And  this  was  the  intention  of  his  enemies:  “They  ap- 
pointed his  grave  with  criminals. ”f  The  loathsome  receptacle 
of  the  dead  in  the  valley  of  Hinnom  would  naturally  receive 


* Zechariah  xii:  io. 

t Isaiah  53:  8.  The  English  version  is  certainly  at  fault  here.  The  subject  of 
the  verb  is  indefinite.  “Man  gab  bei  Frevlern  sein  Grab.’’  Knobel.  De  Wette. 


435 


1 877.]  The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 

the  remains  of  him  who  in  life  was  despised  and  rejected  of 
men.  “ They  gave  him  his  grave  with  criminals,  although  he 
had  done  no  wrong,  neither  was  guile  found  in  his  mouth.” 
This  is  what  the  writer  is  going  to  say.  The  spirit  of  God  will 
not  let  him  say  it.  A strange  parenthesis  breaks  the  continu- 
ity of  his  mournful  thoughts  with  one  bright  beam  of  light : 
“ They  gave  him  his  grave  with  criminals  (still  he  was  with  a 
rich  man  in  his  death  !),  although  he  had  done  no  wrong  !” 
Could  anything  but  Omniscience  have  foreseen  that  in  the 
appalling  hour,  when  the  dearest  disciples  had  forsaken  him,  a 
rich  man,  who  had  hitherto  been  afraid  to  avow  his  allegiance 
to  him,  would  have  had  the  faith  and  the  moral  courage  to 
rescue  from  nameless  sepulture  the  bruised  and  lifeless  remains 
of  the  Messiah  of  God  ! 

But  the  third  combination  is  positively  unanswerable.  And 
it  is  disclosed,  not  in  casual  remarks,  but  throughout  the 
whole  prediction.  He  is  a suffering  and  a triumphant  Messiah. 
His  death  is  not  the  end,  but  the  beginning  of  his  victorious 
career.  In  other  Messianic  prophecies  his  sufferings  are  re- 
served for  separate  and  guarded  descriptions,  and  the  impres- 
sion they  made  at  the  time  was  like  that  which  we  all  receive 
now  from  the  unfulfilled  prophecies  in  the  Apocalypse,  of  woes 
and  disasters  in  the  last  times.  We  do  not  discredit  them, 
neither  do  we  understand  them.  But  on  the  whole  we  are  sure 
that  our  Lord  Christ  will  finally  triumph.  So  the  Jews  were 
disquieted  by  these  strange  predictions  of  humiliation  and 
sorrow,  but  they  kept  the  eye  fixed  on  the  assurances  in  Moses 
and  all  the  prophets,  that  the  anointed  king  of  Israel  would 
overcome  all  his  enemies  and  reign  in  majesty.* 

The  number  and  affluence  of  these  promises  of  his  glory 
were  mercifully  designed  to  keep  out  of  sight  in  times  of  de- 
spondency the  most  crushing  woe  that  was  ever  to  befall  them, 
their  own  betrayal  and  murder  of  their  Messiah.  The  few 
shadows  thrown  upon  the  canvass  by  his  sufferings  were  sel- 
dom observed,  as  they  served  to  heighten  the  brilliant  colors 
in  which  their  everlasting  and  omnipotent  king  was  portrayed 
to  their  ardent  hopes. 

But  here  the  light  ar.d  shade  are  wonderfully  blended.  The 


* Gen.  iii : 15  ; xlix  : 10  ; Num.  xxiv  : 17  ; Ueut.  xviii  : 18-19  ! Ps.  u ; Ps.  xlv  ; 
Ps.  lxxii ; Pi.  cx  ; Mai.  iii : 1;  Mic.  v : 2:  Is.  ix  : 6,7. 


436 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


foreground  and  background  are  brilliant.  The  description  be- 
gins and  ends  in  triumph.  There  is  radiant  glory  lining  the 
darkest  clouds.  Even  death  and  burial  do  not  interrupt  his 
redeeming  work.  He  makes  over  his  soul  as  a sin-offering,  he 
is  entombed  in  the  grave  of  a rich  man,  and  then  he  prolongs 
his  days,  he  beholds  offspring,  the  pleasure  of  Jehovah  prospers 
in  his  hand,  he  makes  many  righteous,  he  secures  the  great  as 
his  portion  and  the  strong  as  his  spoil ! Of  whom  speaketh  the 
prophet  this?  Tragic  poetry  lingers  with  fond  melancholy 
over  the  untimely  death  of  heroes,  who  conquer  and  die  with 
only  distant  visions  of  victory.  And  history  makes  grateful 
record  of  the  inheritance  which  posterity  receives  from  the 
blood  of  martyrs.*  But  here,  he  whose  soul  travails  in  sorrow 
beholds  the  fruit  of  his  suffering  and  is  satisfied.  This  song  of 
triumph  seems  to  be  inspired  by  the  grave  itself.  It  is  precise- 
ly when  he  is  dead  and  buried  that  the  glorious  redemption 
for  which  he  has  poured  out  his  soul  begins  to  attain  decisive 
victory.  Of  whom  speaketh  the  prophet  this  ? Has  this  com- 
bination of  two  contradictory  things  also  been  exactly  verified 
in  history? 

A few  weeks  after  the  crucifixion  and  burial  of  Jesus,  his 
apostles  stood  before  a vast  multitude  of  his  murderers,  trans- 
figured with  a new  faith  and  hope.  There  was  a strange  re- 
serve of  power  in  their  quietness  and  unhesitating  courage  to 
meet  the  present  emergency,  which  hushed  the  turbulent  as- 
sembly to  silence.  One  of  their  number,  who  on  the  night  of 
the  arrest  had  become  confused  by  the  disappointment  of 
all  his  hopes,  and  swore  that  he  knew  nothing  about  this 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  now  steps  forth,  unrolls  the  prophecy 
we  have  in  hand,  and  others  of  the  same  import,  which 
he  could  never  be  made  to  understand  before,  and  by  just  such 
a comparison  of  prediction  with  fact  as  we  are  now  making, 
without  the  slightest  appeal  to  passion,  convinces  every  man 
of  them,  who  will  use  his  reason  at  all,  that  God  has  made  this 
Jesus,  whom  they  crucified,  to  be  both  Lord  and  Messiah. 

What  has  made  this  marvellous  change?  What  has  sudden- 
ly opened  this  mysterious  page  of  prophecy  ? What  has  mar- 

* Knobel  begs  the  question,  by  adducing  this  peculiarity  of  our  prophecy  as  a 
proof  that  it  refers  to  a collective  class,  so  that  when  one  dies  others  continue  the 
work. 


1877-] 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


43  7 


shalled  in  their  true  place  all  those  magnificent  descriptions  of 
the  Messiah’s  power  and  majesty?  And  that  repulsive  instru- 
ment of  torture,  from  which  every  instinct  of  nature  and  every 
feeling  engendered  by  their  education  made  them  shrink  with 
a shudder  ; the  cross,  the  hideous  emblem  of  Jewish  submission 
to  Roman  supremacy;  the  cross,  where  their  beloved  lingered 
in  anguish  and  expired — what  has  tranformed  it  all  at  once  into 
a standard  of  glory  and  victory? 

For  it  was  not  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  but  on  the  third  day, 
and  in  Jerusalem,  by  the  very  grave  of  their  lost  Messiah,  that 
this  sudden  revulsion  of  thought  and  feeling  transpired.  To  this 
fact  we  have  the  testimony  of  a historical  document  whose  gen- 
uineness no  skeptic  ventures  to  question.*  Here  is  a stupen- 
dous miracle.  The  apostles  did  not  expect  a suffering  Messiah. 
They  could  not  be  made  to  believe  their  own  prophecies.  The 
very  night  before  he  suffered  Jesus  tried#n  vain  to  make  them 
understand  that  the  last  things  written  in  our  chapter  and  in 
the  twenty-second  Psalm  were  just  coming  to  an  end.f  But 
they  could  not  believe.  They  buried  in  his  grave  their  last 
hopes.  And  three  days  later  they  did  believe  in  a suffer- 
ing Messiah  ! In  a few  weeks  they  made  thousands  of  the 
conspirators  against  him  believe,  by  an  hour’s  reasoning  on  the 
very  prophecies  that  had  always  been  sealed  books  to  them. 
They  have  made  millions  in  every  age  believe  on  Him.  They 
have  revolutionized  the  religious  thought,  of  the  world. 

One  fact  only  can  make  such  a miracle  as  this  credible— the 
fact  of  the  resurrection  of  the  crucified  Messiah  from  the  dead. 
This  sudden,  complete,  and  enduring  change  of  opinion  could 
never  have  taken  place  without  this  intervening  fact.  Jesus 
the  Messiah  rose  from  the  dead,  was  exalted  by  the  right  hand 
of  God,  received  and  shed  forth  the  promised  Spirit,  and  then 
convinced  his  disciples  that  the  true  Messiah  ought  to  have 
suffered  all  these  things,  planted  in  their  hearts  hopes,  never  to 
be  shattered  again,  that  he  would  reign  in  all  the  majesty  fore- 
told in  the  prophets. 

For  this  was  a literal  prolonging  of  his  days.  The  Holy  One 
was  not  suffered  to  see  corruption.  As  soon  as  he  was  free 
from  the  travail  of  his  soul  he  welcomed  one  redeemed  soul  to 
Paradise,  and  began  to  behold  with  satisfaction  the  accession  of 


* I Cor.  xv  : 4. 

(New  Series,  No.  22.J 


f Luke  xxii  : 37. 
28 


438 


The  Great  Messianic  Prophecy. 


[July, 


innumerable  offspring  to  the  redeemed  family  of  God.  Among 
them  are  the  great.  The  mightiest  of  the  earth  have  been 
gathered  for  his  spoil.  And  it  is  by  his  knowledge  that  this 
righteous  servant  of  Jehovah  is  making  many  righteous.  The 
fierce  followers  of  the  false  prophet  extended  their  conquests 
with  the  fury  of  the  iconoclast  and  the  devotion  of  the  mono- 
theist. But  this  strange  zeal,  the  offspring  of  sensuality  and 
of  fatalism,  has  destroyed,  never  regenerated  nor  assimilated 
the  ignorant  nations  of  the  earth.  And  Christianity  sinks 
gradually  to  the  level  of  Judaism  and  Mohammedism  when 
its  central  truth,  of  justification  through  faith  in  the  crucified 
Messiah  of  God,  is  outraged  by  bloody  conquests,  obscured 
by  superstitious  displays,  or  confused  by  false  philosophy. 
The  only  trace  of  Romish  missions  surviving  in  many  portions 
of  China  and  Japan,  is  the  suspicion  of  political  conspiracy 
that  clings  to  the  Chr^tian  name. 

Mere  intellectual  culture,  without  this  divine  knowledge,  is 
no  more  effective  in  sprinkling  the  nations.  During  the  life- 
time of  pastor  Harms,  his  church  of  farmers  and  mechanics 
sent  more  missionaries  to  the  heathen  than  all  the  wealthy 
congregations  in  New  England,  who  deny  the  atonement  and 
divinity  of  Christ,  have  commissioned  during  their  whole 
history.  The  religion  of  unbelief  is  necessarily  a religion  of 
self-development,  not  of  self-sacrifice  for  lost  souls.  These 
are  not  the  religions  of  Prophecy.  This  Servant  of  Jehovah  is 
neither  the  good  man  of  rationalism,  nor  the  awful  Judge  who 
cannot  be  approached  without  the  mediation  of  saints.  He  is 
the  sprinkler  of  nations.  He  is  the  bearer  of  infirmities  and 
sins.  He  is  the  conqueror  of  the  great  by  the  omnipotent 
sway  of  divine  love  alone.  He  is  spreading  his  bloodless  and 
beneficent  conquests  wherever  burdened  souls  feel  their  guilt 
before  God,  and  find  peace  in  the  chastisement  that  was  laid 
upon  him.  He  has  taken  upon  himself  the  sins  of  the  world  ; 
he  is  making  intercessions  for  transgressors  ; and  in  due  time 
he  shall  see  and  be  satisfied. 


i877-] 


The  Law  Passing  Away,  etc. 


439 


Art.  III.— THE  LAW  PASSING  AWAY,  NOT  BY  DESTRUC- 
TION, BUT  BY  FULFILLMENT. 

By  Addison  Ballard,  Lafayette  College. 

Two  entirely  opposite  ideas  of  liberty  and  progress  are  in- 
dicated in  the  assertion  of  Christ,  that  he  came  not  to  destroy, 
but  to  fulfill  the  law;  coupled,  as  it  is,  with  that  other  declar- 
ation, that  “ not  one  jot  or  tittle  shall  in  any  wise  pass  from 
the  law  till  all  be  fulfilled.” 

These  asseverations  of  Christ  were  necessary  as  guides  and 
correctives  to  both  the  radical  and  the  conservative  thinking 
of  his  time.  For  while  it  is  implied  in  them  that  the  prog- 
ress of  his  kingdom  will  be  marked  by  the  passing  away  of 
the  law,  the  important  distinction  is  made  between  a passing 
away  of  it  by  destruction,  and  a passing  away  by  fulfillment. 
This  distinction  cannot  be  too  clearly  seen,  nor  too  strongly 
emphasized.  But  in  this  we  shall  be  helped  by  first  consider- 
ing how  much  is  embraced  in  that  law  which  Christ  came  to 
fulfill,  but  not  to  destroy. 

It  includes  the  Decalogue.  He  did  not  come  to  destroy  one 
of  those  commandments,  the  whole  of  which  he  summed  as  su- 
preme love  to  God  and  equal  love  to  our  neighbor.  He  did  not 
come  to  paralyze  or  perplex  the  conscience,  loosen  the  bond  of 
virtue,  or  give  new  license  to  sin.  Instead  of  destroying,  he 
aimed  to  reconsecrate  and  to  establish  the  law,  by  paying  to  it 
such  honor  and  devotion  as,  in  the  nature  of  things,  it  could  not 
receive  from  men  or  angels.  Coming  to  save  sinners,  he  under- 
took their  rescue  only  on  the  condition  that  justice  should  re- 
main uncompromised,  and  holiness  untarnished.  Thus  did 
he  who  was  above  the  law  give  to  it  its  mightiest  sanction  by 
his  voluntary  obedience  and  atoning  death. 

Nor,  again,  did  Christ  come  to  destroy  the  ritualistic  or 
ceremonial  law.  He  did  not  destroy  the  Passover,  nor  Pente- 
cost, nor  the  daily  sacrifices  of  slain  victims.  He  did  not  say 
to  the  Jews,  “ Leviticus  is  an  antiquated,  worthless  book. 
Cut  it  out  of  your  parchment  rolls,  and  from  new  copies  of  the 
Scriptures  see  that  it  be  rigorously  excluded.”  Never  did 
he  disturb  the  temple  worship,  upbraid  or  ridicule  the  priests 
for  the  too  exact  performance  of  their  duties,  nor  turn  back 
.any  who  were  going  to  God’s  house  with  either  money  for  its 


440 


The  Law  Passing  Away,  not  by 


[July, 


treasury  or  lambs  and  turtle-doves  for  its  altar.  The  temple 
he  purified,  but  did  not  destroy.  He  drove  out  the  men  who 
defiled  its  sacred  precincts  by  fraud  and  avarice,  but  molested 
none  who  resorted  thither  for  instruction  and  worship. 

Nor,  again,  did  Jesus  come  to  destroy  the  civil  law.  He 
expressed  no  purpose  or  wish  to  free  his  countrymen  from 
their  political  obligations.  Never  did  he  pander  to  the  plotting 
discontent  of  party  faction.  Not  by  act  or  word  did  he 
stimulate  or  encourage  revolutionary  zeal.  Never  did  he  seek 
to  intensify  the  uneasy  spirit  of  his  time,  or  rally  it  to  the 
support  of  any  ambitious  scheme  of  his  own.  Rather  he 
strove  to  allay  the  fever  of  insurrectionary  turbulence  by 
directing  the  thoughts  of  his  fellow-citizens  to  that  prevailing 
corruption  which  was  the  true  cause  of  their  national  humilia- 
tion. He  had  no  quarrel  with  government.  He  did  not  com- 
plain of  taxation.  He  spoke  no  rebellious  words  against 
Caesar.  On  an  attempt  to  inveigle  him  with  some  disloyal 
utterance,  asking  the  loan  of  an  imperial  penny,  with  exquisite 
adroitness  he  inquired  who  was  represented  by  the  image  and 
superscription  stamped  upon  the  coin  ; and  when  it  was  an- 
swered “ Caesar,”  “ Render  then,”  he  said,  “ unto  Caesar  the 
things  that  are  Caesar’s.”  As  much  as  to  say,  “ Do  not  expect 
that  I shall  justify  your  impatient  bitterness  under  the  restraints 
of  civil  order.  Do  not  hope  for  my  aid  in  dissolving  the  bands 
of  political  authority.  I am  not  come  to  destroy  the  civil,  any 
more  than  to  destroy  the  moral,  or  the  ceremonial,  law.” 

This  earnest  declaration  was  an  admonition  to  the  progres- 
sive thought  of  those  who  imagined  that  the  Messiah  was  to 
inaugurate  a freer  and  easier  system  of  both  religion  and  gov- 
ernment ; that  he  would  discard  the  old  for  one  entirely  new, 
with  precepts  less  strict,  and  duties  less  onerous ; who  were 
weary  of  incessant  painstaking  in  matters  of  religion  ; who 
were  tired  of  restrictions,  tired  of  exhausting  performances, 
tired  of  monotonous  and  never-ending  routine  ; who  chafed 
under  the  triple  yoke  of  restraint,  service  and  penalty.  For 
them  the  law  was  too  severe  in  its  exactions,  the  prophets 
were  too  harsh  in  their  denunciations.  They  wished  that  both 
might  be  overthrown  and  pass  away.  At  least,  they  longed 
that  both  might  be  disarmed  : the  law  of  its  rigor,  the  proph- 
ets of  their  maledictions. 


I8/7-] 


Destruction , but  by  Fulfillment. 


441 


There  was,  however,  another  class  which  did  not  desire  this, 
but  desired  the  contrary  ; the  class  which  dreaded  any  dis- 
turbance of  the  old  and  settled  order,  deprecated  innovation, 
viewed  with  indignation  any  attempt  to  invalidate  transmitted 
requirements,  or  modify  established  usages ; the  class  which 
insisted  that  the  letter  of  the  law  must  be  punctiliously  kept, 
that  the  mint,  anise  and  cummin  must  be  scrupulously  tithed, 
that  the  last  gnat  must  be  strained  out  from  every  Abrahamic 
wine-jar. 

Now,  both  these  classes  of  persons  were  correct  in  part  ; in 
part  both  were  wrong.  Both  misjudged  the  nature  of  that 
liberty  which  Christ  was  to  introduce,  and  the  characteristics 
of  that  better  future  which  he  was  to  usher  in.  Yet  a good 
and  true  idea  lay  under  the  expectations  of  each.  What  was 
right  and  true  Jesus  interpreted  and  retained;  what  was 
false  and  injurious  he  exposed  and  rejected. 

Jesus  did  indeed  come  to  give  freedom.  It  had  been  fore- 
told of  him  that  he  would  open  prison-doors  and  give  liberty 
to  them  that  are  bound.  Yet  not  an  absolute  freedom  was 
this  to  be,  not  a breaking  of  all  bands  asunder,  not  a casting 
away  of  all  cords.  His  coming  was  to  be,  indeed,  the  signal 
for  the  passing  away  of  both  the  law  and  the  prophets,  but  this 
passing  away  was  not  by  any  means  to  be  a destructioti.  They 
were  to  pass  away  only  by  being  exactly  and  perfectly  fulfilled. 
Not  the  smallest  particle  was  to  pass  away  by  subversion,  by 
abrogation,  nor  even  by  relaxation.  The  law  was  to  bind 
in  the  letter  until  fully  accomplished  in  spirit. 

This  leads  us  to  illustrate  more  fully  the  difference  between 
these  two  modes  of  disappearance  or  passing  away. 

When  plaster  is  thrown  over  hills  of  corn,  or  scattered  over 
wheat-fields,  the  white  patches  are  visible  for  a few  days,  after 
which  they  disappear,  and  the  ground  is  a uniform  brown  or 
black  as  before.  The  plaster  is  not,  however,  destroyed,  be- 
cause its  end  is  fulfilled.  It  is  not  lost  ; it  is  simply  trans- 
formed. It  reappears  in  blade,  stalk,  ear  and  grain.  It 
passes  away,  but  only  by  absorption  into  new  and  more 
valuable  forms.  The  leaves  that  strew  the  forest  do  not 
perish.  They  fall,  but  it  is  only  to  rise  again,  mounting  in  the 
stems  they  nourish  to  loftier  heights,  and  spread  out  in  wider 
amplitudes  of  growth.  The  mould  cast  about  our  fruit-trees 


442 


The  Law  Passing  Away , not  by 


[July, 


is  heavy,  inert,  cumbrous  ; but,  sought  out  and  vitalized  by  the 
roots,  it  acquires  power  and  motion  and  upward  impulse,  and 
takes  on  shapes  of  glad  and  living  beauty,  and  wealth  of  fruit- 
fulness. The  great  river  does  not  dry  up  in  its  course,  but 
pouring  on  with  increasing  volume  and  momentum,  instead  of 
failing  at  its  delta,  just  there  where  it  ceases  to  be  a river,  it 
finds  enlargement  in  the  expanding  lake  or  estuary.  While  as 
affluent  and  prophecy  the  river  passes  away,  as  a fulfillment  it 
abides,  only  with  freer  scope  and  larger  room.  Examples,  all 
these,  of  passing  away  by  passing  into  higher  and  more  endur- 
ing forms. 

Thus  it  is — to  take  a single  example — that  the  Passover 
passed  away  by  passing  into  the  Lord’s  Supper.  Thus  it  is  that 
we  still  have  a propriety  and  a living  interest  in  all  the  typical 
worship  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  fulfilled  and  glorified  as  it  is 
in  the  spiritual  worship  of  the  New.  Were  the  import  of 
these  words  of  our  Lord  more  deeply  pondered,  there  would  be 
fewer  of  those  who  “ aim  to  depreciate  Christianity  by  dis- 
covering in  it  as  many  marks  as  possible  of  Jewish  weakness 
and  bigotry.”  It  were  much  better  if  they  would  instead  turn 
their  thoughts  to  the  nobler  object  of  elevating  that  older  wor- 
ship by  tracing  in  it  the  rudiments  and  promise  of  Christianity. 
Was  it  a day  of  shadows  ? Yet  shadows  are  resemblances,  and 
wherein  shall  the  resemblance  be  found  but  in  the  common 
truths  and  relations  pervading  both  ? By  means  of  an  earthly 
sanctuary'  and  the  carnal  ordinances  growing  out  of  and  con- 
tinually encircling  around  it,  God  manifested  on  his  part  the 
same  character  and  government  toward  his  people,  and  required 
on  their  part  the  same  exercises  of  principle  toward  himself 
which  he  now  does  under  the  spiritual  dispensation  of  the 
gospel.  In  both  alike  we  see  a pure  and  holy  God  enshrined 
in  the  recesses  of  a glorious  sanctuary,  unapproachable  by 
guilty,  polluted  flesh,  except  through  a medium  of  powerful 
intercession  and  cleansing  efficacy ; yet  to  those  who  thus 
approach,  most  merciful  and  gracious,  full  of  loving-kindness 
and  plenteous  in  redemption,  while  in  every  act  of  sincere 
approach  on  their  part  are  brought  into  exercise  the  same  feel- 
ings of  contrition  and  abasement,  of  self-renunciation  and 
realizing  faith,  of  child-like  dependence  and  adoring  gratitude.* 


Fairbairn  (Typology.) 


!8 77-] 


Destruction , but  by  Fulfillment. 


443 


The  distinction  we  have  illustrated  indicates  further  the 
methods  to  be  employed,  if  moral  requirements,  in  their  aspect 
of  penal  severity,  are  to  pass  away  from  those  who  are  under 
bondage  to  them  by  reason  of  transgression.  That  method  is 
not  to  take  part  with  the  criminal  against  the  requirement. 
It  is  not  to  tell  him  that  the  law  is  inhuman  and  merciless.  It 
is  not  to  sympathize  morbidly  with  him,  as  if  he  were  the  vic- 
tim of  circumstances  and  a martyr  to  civil  order.  It  will  not 
do  to  say  to  the  inmates  of  our  prisons,  “ The  law  displays  a 
retaliatory,  vindictive  spirit  to  immure  you  in  these  dreadful 
walls,  separating  you  from  your  friends  and  affixing  to  your 
person  the  badges  of  dishonor.”  To  say  that  would  but  make 
the  matter  a thousand  times  worse  ; worse  for  the  criminal,  as 
well  as  worse  for  society.  It  would  encourage  him  in  crime, 
and  so  complete  his  ruin.  What  we  desire  is,  that  the  law 
may  pass  away  from  the  transgressor  as  an  object  of  dread  and 
of  antipathy.  And  this  is  to  be  effected,  not' by  our  destroying 
the  law,  but  by  his  fulfilling  it.  Offenders  must  be  made  to  see 
the  wisdom,  reasonableness,  safety,  and  greater  satisfaction  of 
virtuous  citizenship,  and  to  surrender  their  lawless  propensities 
intelligently  and  freely.  They  must  be  led  to  see  that  the 
attitude  of  society  toward  them  is  not  that  of  gratuitous  and 
hostile  menace,  but  of  calm  justice  and  necessary  self-defence. 
Something  wonderful  is  it  to  see  how  completely  the  law,  as 
an  object  of  aversion  and  terror,  passes  away  from  the  violator 
of  it  so  soon  as  he  comes  into  relations  with  it  of  right  and 
willing  obedience. 

This  same  distinction  leads  us  on  to  the  true  idea  of  both 
political  and  religious  enlightenment  and  freedom,  and  points 
out  how  that  idea  is  to  be  realized.  It  instructs  us  that  the 
millennium  of  political  freedom  is  not  to  be  brought  in  through 
the  destruction  of  government ; not  by  communism  nor  agra- 
rianism ; not  by  the  burning  of  decrees,  codes  and  statutes  ; 
not  by  the  tearing  down  of  senate  houses  and  thrones.  Polit- 
ical abuses,  oppressions,  inequalities  are  surely  to  pass  away, 
but  not  through  the  iconoclasm  of  mobs.  “All  the  overthrows 
of  all  the  tyrannies  of  ancient  or  modern  times  were  never 
able  to  make  corruption  free.  Let  changes  (of  policy  or  ad- 
ministration) be  as  specious  as  they  may,  the  political  suffering 
will  only  deepen  until  the  personal  reform  come  to  redeem  the 


444 


The  Law  Passing  Away,  not  by 


[July, 


land.”  True,  abiding  freedom  can  be  attained  only  as  men 
are  instructed  into  the  knowledge  of  that  wherein  true  freedom 
lies ; only  as  they  are  roused  to  the  intelligent,  hearty  adoption 
of  those  maxims  of  industry,  frugality  and  integrity  through 
which  alone  law  ceases  to  be  compulsion  by  passing  into  self- 
control. 

And,  lastly,  this  far-reaching  declaration  of  Christ  gives  us 
the  true  conception  and  method  of  religious  freedom.  Every- 
where we  see  men  chafing  against  restraint ; against  just  lim- 
itations of  human  reason  and  human  pride.  Everywhere  we 
see  restless  desire  and  determined  effort  to  break  bands  and 
cast  away  cords.  ‘‘Are  we  slaves,”  demand  many,  “that  we 
must  be  chained  down  forever  by  menacing  prohibitions,  under 
which  the  generations  have  groaned  from  the  beginning?  Are 
we  never  to  outgrow  the  narrow  dogmas,  hampering  supersti- 
tions and  craven  fears  of  ignorance  and  childishness  ? Never 
to  be  done  with^the  rusty,  antiquated  creeds  of  our  forefathers  ? 
Must  we  ever  gasp  in  the  atmosphere  of  old  and  smothering 
bigotry?  Is  it  not  time  that  we  assert  our  majority  and  break 
loose  from  the  tyranny  of  the  past  ?” 

There  is  to  be  progress.  There  is  to  be  enlargement  of 
privilege.  There  is  to  be  increase  of  spiritual  liberty.  But 
this  is  not  to  come  in  the  manner  which  many  conceive.  There 
is  to  be  a passing  away  of  prohibition,  restraint,  dogmas;  but 
this  is  not  to  be  by  annihilation  of  any  just  obligation,  nor  of 
any  truth.  Christ,  the  animating,  guiding  spirit  of  all  true 
enlightenment  and  progress,  has  purposed  that  better  future 
when  men  shall  be  free  from  galling  yokes.  But  he  it  is  who 
“verily”  assures  us  that  the  ends  of  law  are  not  to  be  secured 
through  mere  destruction  of  its  outward  forms ; he  is  not 
deceived,  and  will  not  be  mocked  by  that  pretended  superiority 
to  the  letter  which  only  veils  a lack  of  its  spirit.  That  inde- 
pendence of  restraint  for  which  many  sigh,  is  not  born  of  radi- 
cal resolutions,  free-love  conventions,  nor  of  hackneyed  whole- 
sale denunciations  of  Calvinism  and  Puritanism.  It  comes,  and 
can  come,  only  as  the  great  underlying,  ever-abiding  principles 
of  civil  order,  moral  precept  and  spiritual  worship  are  incor- 
porated into  the  soul ; only  as  men  become  free  in  the  love  of 
right  and  of  order,  in  perfected  love  towards  God  and  man. 

“In  all  its  sacred  constitution,”  says  Huntingdon,*  “ society 


^Aspects  of  Human  Society. 


iS77-] 


Destruction , but  by  Fulfillment. 


445 


preaches  the  sacredness  of  law,  and  so  points  with  reverent 
finger  from  human  law  to  the  divine,  and  to  Him  in  whose 
breast  both  have  their  seat  at  last.  By  being  servants  we  be- 
come children  and  heirs.  By  law  we  gain  liberty.  By  waiting 
at  the  foot  of  Sinai  we  are  taken  up  into  Olivet  and  Tabor. 
The  tables  of  stone  lean  against  the  cross.  Moses  is  followed 
by  the  Messiah.  Beyond  the  valleys  of  subjection  rise  the 
eternal  hills  of  peace.  The  years  of  unquestioning  and  obedi- 
ent toil  ended,  there  is  proclaimed  the  great  Sabbatic  festival, 
where  law  is  love, „ and  order  is  choice,  and  government  is 
Fatherhood,  and  the  Ruler’s  will  is  the  impulse  of  every  heart.” 


Art.  IV.— PRESBYTERIANISM  ON  THE  FRONTIERS.* 

By  Rev.  Joseph  F.  Tuttle,  President  of  Wabash  College. 

The  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia,  formed  “about  the  begin- 
ning of  the  year  1705,”  “consisted  of  seven  ministers”  and  a 
score  of  churches.  This  germ  in  half  a century  had  grown  into 
two  Synods,  which  included  ninety-four  ministers,  and  a still 
greater  number  of  churches.  From  that  time  “to  the  commence- 
ment of  the  Revolutionary  War  the  growth  of  the  church  had 
been  rapid  and  almost  uninterrupted.” 

When  the  differences  between  the  Colonies  and  the  mother 
country  were  “submitted  to  the  arbitrament  of  war,”  the  Presby- 
terian Church  had  become  a commanding  power  in  the  Middle 
and  Southern  States.  Although  Mr.  Jefferson,  in  his  auto- 
biography, did  not  name  the  Presbyterian  clergy  in  his  account 
of  the  means  adopted  “to  fire  the  heart  of  the  country,”  we 
know  from  other  sources  that  they  were  prominent  in  the 
movement.  He  says  : “We  were  under  the  conviction  of  the 
necessity  of  arousing  our  people  from  the  lethargy  into  which 
they  had  fallen,  as  to  passing  events,  and  thought  that  the 
appointment  of  a day  of  general  fasting  and  prayer  would  be 
most  likely  to  call  up  and  alarm  their  attention.  * * * 

*The  Synod  of  Indiana  was  formally  organized  on  the  18th  of  October,  1826. 
On  the  fiftieth  anniversary  of  that  event  the  Synods  of  Indiana  South,  and  Indiana 
North,  met  in  the  First  Presbyterian  Church  of  Indianapolis,  which  occasioned  the 
preparation  of  this  historical  sketch. 


446  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.  [J  uly, 

* * We  cooked  up  a resolution  somewhat  modernizing  the 

phrases — of  the  Puritans — for  appointing  the  1st  day  of  June, 
1774,  on  which  the  Port  bill  was  to  commence,  for  a day  of 
fasting,  humiliation  and  prayer,  to  implore  Heaven  to  avert 
from  us  the  evils  of  civil  war,  to  inspire  us  with  firmness  in 
support  of  our  rights,  and  to  turn  the  hearts  of  the  King  and 
Parliament  to  moderation  and  justice.  * * * This  was  in 

May,  1774.  * * * \ve  returned  home,  and  in  our  several 

counties  invited  the  clergy  to  meet  assemblies  of  the  people 
on  the  1st  of  June,  to  perform  the  ceremonies  of  the  day,  and 
to  address  to  them  discourses  suited  to  the  occasion.” — (Jef- 
ferson's Works,  I.,  7.) 

It  is  sufficient  to  remark  that  none  responded  with  greater 
zeal  to  this  invitation  than  the  Presbyterian  ministers  of  the 
Middle  and  Southern  States.  Until  the  war  began  our 
church  had  shown  great  vigor,  and  was  rapidly  spreading  in  all 
the  States  south  of  New  England ; but  with  the  war  came 
disastrous  changes.  The  ministers  were  scattered,  churches 
enfeebled,  some  houses  of  worship  were  burned,  others  desecra- 
ted by  the  enemy,  and  the  community  at  large  seemed  unusually 
afflicted  with  an  extraordinary  increase  of  impiety  and  infidel- 
ity. And  hence  it  was  not  strange  that  when  the  war  closed, 
our  church  was  much  weaker  than  when  it  began. 

From  the  beginning  it  had  been  a missionary  church.  Its 
early  preachers  had  been  famous  for  their  extensive  journeys 
to  preach  the  gospel  in  destitute  regions.  They  were  not  con- 
tent to  visit  the  regions  that  could  be  safely  and  easily  reached, 
but  many  of  them,  with  rare  courage,  went  to  the  very  fron- 
tiers, which  were  often  rendered  dangerous  by  the  incursions 
of  the  Indians. 

As  already  intimated,  the  immediate  effect  of  the  war  on  the 
church  was  disastrous,  but  no  sooner  was  it  ended  than  new 
life  began  to  show  itself.  Decayed  churches  were  resuscitated, 
new  ones  planted,  pastors  installed,  missionaries  sent  out, 
young  men  of  promise  educated  for  the  ministry;  in  a word, 
the  church  once  more  became  aggressive. 

All  this  was  preparing  the  way  for  the  more  perfect  organiza- 
tion of  the  church  in  1 788,  with  the  General  Assembly  as  its  high- 
est judicatory.  And  now  we  reach  a period  of  the  greatest  in- 
terest, both  from  the  positive  opposition  encountered,  and  the 


i877-] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


447 


positive  encroachments  which  our  missionaries  made  on  the 
world.  In  the  older  States  the  French  infidelity  had  obtained 
a powerful  hold  on  the  minds  of  multitudes  who  did  not  hesi- 
tate to  denounce  “ religion  as  mere  priestcraft.”  It  was  com- 
monly reported  that  Mr.  Jefferson  himself  had  said,  “that  in 
fifty  years  the  Bible  would  be  no  more  consulted  than  an  old 
almanac !” 

After  the  war  was  over  infidel  clubs  were  formed,  which  in- 
cluded large  numbers  of  wealthy  and  intelligent  men.  These 
were  formed  in  different  States.  The  late  Mr.  Israel  Crane  of 
Bloomfield,  N.  J.,  once  named  the  societies  of  this  sort,  which 
formed  a cordon  from  Paulus  Hook  through  New  Jersey,  to 
Newburg  on  the  Hudson,  and  many  of  their  prominent  mem- 
bers. He  stated  that  they  were  violent  in  their  opposition  to 
religion  ; and  also  the  remarkable  fact  that  many  of  these  men 
came  to  a violent  death.  The  late  Rev.  Peter  Kanouse,  of 
Sussex  County,  N.  J.,  a very  intelligent  witness,  also  made  the 
same  statement.  The  purpose  seemed  to  be  to  uproot  Chris- 
tianity. 

Nor  was  this  hostility  confined  to  words  and  sneers,  but  in 
some  cases  showed  itself  in  such  sports  as  horse-races  on 
the  Sabbath,  and  even  in  defiling  the  hated  meeting-houses 
outside,  and  covering  the  walls  within  with  obscene  and  blas- 
phemous caricatures.  At  least  one  of  the  Presbyterian  churches 
in  Morris  County,  N.  J.,  in  the  immediate  neighborhood  of 
one  of  the  most  violent  of  these  infidel  clubs,  was  so  daubed 
over  with  filth  and  caricatures  as  to  be  unfit  for  use,  the  dese- 
cration not  having  been  discovered  until  Sabbath  morning. 
Nor  was  this  the  only  case.  Besides  this  the  ministers  were 
sometimes  subjected  to  violence,  and  often  were  treated  in  the 
rudest  manner  by  these  drunken  and  bitter  opposers. 

It  would  be  easy  to  multiply  statements  of  this  sort,  show- 
ing the  condition  of  the  country  when  our  church,  begin- 
ning to  recover  itself  from  the  distressing  demoralization  of  the 
war,  renewed  its  consecration  to  the  great  work  of  preaching 
the  gospel,  not  merely  in  the  older  regions,  but  in  the  new 
and  distant  sections,  both  at  the  South  and  West.  It  is  not 
meant  to  assert  that  the  difficulty  was  one  entirely  arising 
from  the  widespread  infidelity.  It  originated  in  other  causes 
also,  as  in  the  illiteracy  of  vast  numbers  in  the  remote  regions, 


448 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


[July. 


where  schools  were  few  and  usually  poor,  and  also  in  the 
alarming  lack  of  the  English  Scriptures — a lack  so  remarkable 
that  the  New  England  clergy  were  impelled  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  Presbyterians  to  it.  There  were  whole  counties  in 
Virginia,  North  Carolina  and  Tennessee  in  which  there  was  not 
a church  of  any  sort,  and  it  was  alleged  that  there  were  multi- 
tudes of  American  people  who  had  never  attended  a religious 
service  or  heard  a religious  discourse.  In  some  cases,  where 
a traveling  minister  had  preached  and  then  gone  away,  per- 
sons convicted  of  sin  by  this  means  absolutely  did  not  know  of 
a Christian  man  or  woman  anywhere  within  many  miles,  of 
whom  they  could  go  and  ask  the  question,  “What  shall  we 
do  to  be  saved  ?” 

If  now  we  recur  to  the  year  1788,  when  our  General  Assembly 
was  formed,  we  shall  find  the  beginning  of  great  changes.  The 
printing  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  English  had  been  started 
only  six  years  before  ; although  against  the  law  of  England, 
two  editions  of  the  English  Bible  had  been  previously  printed 
in  this  country,  and  the  circulation  of  the  Scriptures  was  car- 
ried forward  to  some  extent  in  the  destitute  regions. 

The  condition  of  things  in  the  “Old  Redstone  Country” — as 
Western  Pennsylvania  was  called — had  become  very  interesting, 
as  also  in  Western  New  York.  Soon  after  the  Revolutionary 
War  the  pioneers  began  to  push  westward  up  the  Mohawk, 
toward  the  valley  of  the  Genesee  and  the  shores  of  Lake  Erie. 
In  like  manner  the  bold  frontiermen  left  the  valleys  of  the 
Susquehanna  and  Juniata,  and,  crossing  the  Alleghenies,  set- 
tled in  the  valleys  of  the  Monongahela  and  the  Allegheny. 
Of  the  most  thoroughly  Presbyterian  stock,  these  last  made 
the  “ Old  Redstone  Country”  scarcely  less  famous  than  Scot- 
land itself  for  its  devotion  to  Presbyterianism. 

It  is  affecting  to  note  the  alarm  of  the  General  Assembly 
near  the  close  of  the  last  century,  in  view  of  “ the  profligacy 
and  corruption  of  public  morals,  profaneness,  pride,  luxury, 
injustice,  intemperance,  lewdness,  and  ever)'-  species  of  de- 
bauchery and  loose  indulgence,”  which  prevailed  in  the  older 
sections  of  the  country,  as  also  “the  formality  and  deadness” 
of  the  churches.  And  yet  the  church  was  getting  ready  for 
those  glorious  revivals  which  make  up  so  marked  a part  of  her 
history,  during  the  latter  part  of  the  last  century  and  the  first 
third  of  the  present. 


i877-] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


449 


If  the  churches  seemed  dead  in  the  older  regions,  the  power 
of  God  was  wonderfully  displayed  in  some  portions  of  the 
newer,  at  the  West  and  South.  Beginning  with  “ Morris” 
Reading  House” — 1740 — it  seemed  as  if  some  irresistible  in- 
fluence were  pressing  God’s  people  to  wrestle  with  him  for 
Virginia.  And  if  we  consider  the  origin  of  the  movement,  its 
progress  and  its  instruments,  we  are  struck  with  astonishment. 
That  most  extraordinary  man,  President  Davies,  although  the 
greatest  among  thqm,  was  the  type  of  the  minister  who  her- 
alded the  great  revival  in  Virginia.  Throngs  followed  him  . 
As  an  orator,  even  with  his  manuscripts  before  him,  his  friends 
in  Virginia  regarded  him  a greater  preacher  even  than  White- 
field.  But  it  was  not  mere  eloquence  that  enabled  him  to  do 
what  he  did.  He  opened  the  secret  of  his  power  as  a pulpit 
orator  to  a friend,  and  we  see  what  was  the  lock  of  his  strength. 
When  he  preached  the  terrors  of  the  Lord,  he  himself  shud- 
dered ; or  the  love  of  Jesus,  he  himself  melted  into  unutterable 
tenderness.  Sometimes  more  than  at  others,  yet  habitually  in 
some  degree,  when  he  preached,  he  felt  that  he  might  not 
preach  again,  and  as  if  he  might  step  from  the  pulpit  to  the 
judgment-bar. 

The  war  dealt  harshly  with  these  churches  in  Virginia  ; but 
about  the  time  our  General  Assembly  was  organized  there 
came  another  season  of  extraordinary  revival  power  to  that 
region.  Although  Davies  had  been  away  for  years,  there  were 
on  that  field  such  men  as  William  Graham  of  Liberty  Hall 
Academy,  the  trainer  of  Archibald  Alexander,  and  John  Blair 
Smith.  If  we  may  credit  Dr.  Alexander,  the  American  church 
has  had  few  greater  men  than  these.  There  was  also  James 
Waddell,  “the  blind  preacher,”  whose  eloquence  was  said  to 
be  beyond  even  the  lofty  eulogium  of  Wirt.  Nash  Le  Grand 
was  also  a rising  luminary,  and  William  Hill,  afterward  “the 
patriarch  of  Winchester,”  was  just  coming  on  the  stage.  In 
some  respects  not  one  of  them  was  greater  than  Moses  Hoge, 
whom  John  Randolph  believed  to  be  the  greatest  divine  of  his 
day.  Drury  Lacy,  Vice-President  of  Hampden  Sidney  Col- 
lege for  a time,  was  another  very  remarkable  man,  who  ap- 
peared in  what  was  called  by  Dr.  Alexander  “ the  great  revival.” 
And  while  this  work  was  sweeping  over  Virginia,  young 
Archibald  Alexander  wrote  that  they  had  “ heard  of  a revival 


450 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


[July, 


of  the  same  kind  in  Western  Pennsylvania,  under  the  labors  of 
the  Rev.  Joseph  Smith,  the  Rev.  John  McMillan,  and  others.” 
He  adds  a remark  concerning  the  Scotch  Presbyterians  of  the 
Valley  of  the  Virginia,  which  no  doubt  expressed  a similar 
feeling  among  the  Scotch  Presbyterians  in  “ the  Redstone 
country.”  The  remark  was  this,  “ the  general  impression  was 
that  these  religious  commotions  would  pass  away  like  the 
morning  cloud.”  The  fear  was  proved  to  be  groundless,  as 
applying  to  Western  Pennsylvania.  The  religious  history  of 
this  region  has  been  very  remarkable.  There  is  no  part  of  the 
history  of  Presbyterianism  on  the  frontier  more  so.  In  No- 
vember, 1758,  the  Rev.  Charles  Beatty  preached  the  first 
Protestant  sermon  west  of  the  Alleghenies  within  the  walls  of 
Fort  Pitt.  The  mission  of  Beatty  and  Brainard  in  1763  to  the 
“distressed  frontier  inhabitants”  in  that  region,  had  been  pre- 
vented by  the  renewal  of  savage  hostilities  on  such  a scale 
that  west  of  Shippensburg  every  building  was  burned,  many 
people  were  murdered,  and  many  perished  in  the  flight.  Dr. 
Wing  speaks  of  the  panic  among  the  people  as  “one  of  ex- 
traordinary extent  and  intensity.”  The  people  “fled  almost 
in  a body  over  the  mountains  toward  Lancaster.”  (Wing’s 
Discourse  on  Presbyteries  of  Donegal  and  Carlisle  16,  Cen. 
Mem.,  West  Penn.,  209.)  The  author  of  “Old  Redstone” 
describes  the  pitiable  condition  of  those  who  found  refuge  at 
Shippensburg. 

Although  a Mr.  Anderson,  soon  after  Mr.  Beatty’s  visit — 
probably  in  1767 — was  directed  to  preach  to  the  people  in  this 
region,  and  the  Presbytery  of  Donegal  was  ordered  by  the 
Synod  “ to  supply  the  western  frontier  with  ten  Sabbaths  of 
ministerial  labor,”  yet  Dr.  Eaton  asserts  that  “the  first  of  the 
pioneer  ministers  who  visited  this  region,”  to  prepare  the  way 
for  a permanent  settlement,  “ was  the  Rev.  James  Finley,  in 
1771.  The  Rev.  James  Powers  made  his  first  visit  in  1774,  and 
in  1776  removed  his  family.  (Cen.  Mem.,  West  Penn.,  209, 
Sprague  III,  327.) 

In  1775  the  Rev.  John  McMillan,  one  of  the  most  remark- 
able of  our  pioneer  preachers,  made  his  first  visit  to  the  Red- 
stone country.  In  1 776  he  was  ordained  at  Chambersburg,  but 
on  account  of  the  hostility  of  the  Indians  did  not  remove  his 
family  until  1778;  but  during  the  intervening  period  he  him- 


1877.] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


45i 


self  visited  his  selected  field  of  labor  to  perform  ministerial 
duties  among  the  people  in  that  truly  distressed  region.  He 
is  described  by  Dr.  Eaton  as  “not  attractive  in  personal  ap- 
pearance ; six  feet  in  height,  rough-hewn  in  features,  brusque 
in  manner,  and  with  a voice  that  was  like  the  rumbling  of 
thunder.” 

The  Rev.  Thaddeus  Dodd,  of  New  Jersey,  reached  the  Red- 
stone country  in  1777  the  first  time,  and  in  1779,  having  been 
ordained,  returned  for  permanent  settlement.  For  a time  his 
labor  was  within  blockhouses  and  forts,  which  the  people  had 
built  for  protection  against  the  savages.  It  is  an  interesting 
fact  that  in  these  unfavorable  circumstances  his  preaching  re- 
sulted in  a revival,  which  added  forty  converts  to  the  church, 
or  rather  they  professed  their  faith  before  the  church  was  or- 
ganized in  1781.  It  was  an  affecting  sign  of  the  distresses  of 
the  times,  that  this  pioneer  preacher,  who  had  seen  “converts 
multiplied  ” under  his  ministry,  is  said  to  have  been  on  his  field 
four  years  before  he  administered  the  Lord’s  Supper.  In  1783 
he  held  his  first  sacramental  meeting  in  a barn.* 

In  1779  a fourth  man,  the  Rev.  Joseph  Smith,  came  to  the 
Redstone  country"  who  was  the  worthy"  co-worker  of  the  three 
already  named,  and  who  was  also  to  exert  a powerful  influence 
in  that  region  as  a preacher  and  as  one  of  the  founders  of 
Jefferson  College.  The  descriptions  given  of  him  show  how  it 
was  that  he  should  exert  such  a powerful  influence  as  a pioneer 
preacher.  Winning  in  manner,  imposing  in  person,  powerful 
in  thought,  devoted  in  piety,  impassioned  in  voice  and  action, 
he  was  at  times  overpowering  in  his  discourses.  His  work  as 
a preacher  was  only  exceeded  in  results  by  his  relations  to  the 
founding  of  Jefferson  College.  McMillan,  Dodd  and  Smith, 
like  Tennent  at  Neshaminy,  taught  schools  in  their  own 
houses,  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  training  yroung  men  for  the 
ministry.  And  it  surely  was  not  the  smallest  of  the  results 
they  achieved  that  two  colleges — now  happily'  one — grew  out 
of  these  schools  in  the  wilderness. 

In  May  1781  the  Synod  of  New  York  and  Philadelphia  or- 
ganized the  Presby'tery  of  Redstone,  the  first  west  of  the 
Alleghenies.  Powers,  McMillan,  Dodd  and  Smith — all  just 


* Sprague  iii:  358 ; Gittelt  i : 262. 


452 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


[July, 


described — were  its  first  members.  Although  its  first  meeting 
was  appointed  to  be  held  at  the  Laurel  Hill  Church,  on  the  third 
Wednesday  of  the  following  September,  Dr.  McMillan  says 
the  “first  Presbytery  that  met  on  this  side  of  the  mountains 
was  held  at  Mount  Pleasant  on  the  third  week  of  October, 
I783-” 

Although  the  church  edifices  were  few  and  rude  for  several 
years,  religion  greatly  flourished  in  this  region.  It  is  true  that 
at  times  the  people  were  compelled  to  flee  to  their  blockhouses 
and  forts,  and  that  even  in  the  most  favorable  times  their  cir- 
cumstances were  by  no  means  inviting;  yet,  whether  in  the 
grove,  the  log  meeting-house,  or  the  fort,  they  were  favored 
with  some  great  religious  awakenings. 

In  1778  the  exhortations  of  Joseph  Patterson,  in  “Vance’s 
Fort,”  were  the  means  of  leading  a score  to  Christ,  the  germ  of 
the  Cross  Creek  church,  of  which  one  of  the  converts,  the  Rev. 
Thomas  Marquis,  was  the  pastor  for  many  years.  (Cen.  Mem., 
41.)  Dr.  Sprague  says:  “Mr.  Dodd’s  labors  throughout  his 
whole  ministry  seem  to  have  been  attended  with  much  more 
than  an  ordinary  blessing.  Besides  the  regular  increase  of  his 
church  from  year  to  year,  there  were  several  seasons  of  special 
religious  interest  which  brought  in  large  numbers.”  He  died 
in  1793,  while  his  church  was  still  feeling  the  power  of  a great 
revival. 

Dr.  McMillan  says  that  from  1781  to  1794  his  churches  were 
experiencing  powerful  refreshings,  and  that  during  those 
thirteen  years  numbers  were  added  at  every  sacramental  occa- 
sion. Indeed,  it  may  be  said  that  this  remarkable  man  lived 
in  almost  a perpetual  revival  during  his  ministry  of  more  than 
half  a century.  Some  of  these  awakenings  were  very  extensive 
and  wonderful  in  their  power.  They  spread  through  Western 
Pennsylvania,  and  reached  the  frontier  settlements  in  Ken- 
tucky and  Tennessee. 

Dr.  Carnahan  describes  Mr.  Powers  also  as  not  only  an  effec- 
tive preacher,  but  a truly  successful  one.  The  Rev.  Joseph 
Smith  was  one  of  the  most  remarkable  men  that  ever  preached 
on  any  of  the  frontiers,  not  only  in  his  piety  and  gifts  as  a 
preacher,  but  in  the  truly  astonishing  effects  which  often 
attended  his  ministry. 

If  now  we  add  to  the  names  of  the  original  members  of  the 


1 8 77.]  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.  453 

Redstone  Presbytery,  such  as  Joseph  Patterson,  Elijah  Mc- 
Curdy, David  Smith  and  others,  who  belonged  to  it  or  to  Pres- 
byteries springing  from  it — “ able,  devoted  and  self-denying 
men,  whose  influence  is  felt  at  the  present  day” — we  shall  see 
why  Presbyterianism  obtained  such  an  overmastering  influence 
in  Western  Pennsylvania.  It  began  with  a remarkable  popula- 
tion, had  remarkable  pioneer  ministers,  and  truly  remarkable 
revivals  of  religion.  The  history  of  it  abounds  in  incidents 
that  seem  like  romance.  Indeed,  if  we  consider  them,  the  re- 
vivals and  the  results,  we  have  no  more  thrilling  chapter  in  the 
history  of  our  Church  than  this. 

Such  were  the  beginnings  of  Presbyterianism  on  the  frontiers 
of  Western  Pennsylvania.  They  were  not  less  remarkable  in 
Western  New  York  and  Northern  Ohio,  but  as  the  Synod  of 
Indiana  was  descended  from  the  Presbyterianism  of  Western 
Pennsylvania, Virginia  and  Kentucky,  we  may  omit  extended 
descriptions  of  that  which  has  exerted  so  great  an  influence 
in  the  northern  half  of  Ohio,  and  in  all  the  States  west  of 
Indiana. 

Our  sketch  will  not  be  complete,  as  related  to  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  Synod  of  Indiana,  without  referring  briefly  to  the 
introduction  and  history  of  Presbyterianism  in  Kentucky. 

In  1783  the  Rev.  David  Rice  began  his  labors  in  Kentucky. 
In  1784  the  Rev.  Adam  Rankin  and  Rev.  James  Crawford 
came  to  the  same  field ; and  in  1786  the  Rev.  Andrew  Mc- 
Clure and  Rev.  Thomas  B.  Craighead.  That  year  these  men, 
with  an  evangelist,  the  Rev.  Zerah  Templin,  were  organized 
into  the  first  Presbytery  in  that  State.  Not  long  afterward 
came  Robert  Marshall,  a remarkable  man,  a convert  of  Dr.  Mc- 
Millan, and  Carey  H.  Allen.  Their  journey  to  Kentucky  was 
perilous,  but  its  results  were  great  in  extensive  revivals.  The 
history  of  Presbyterianism  in  Kentucky  is  full  of  romantic  in- 
terest, and  is  connected  with  remarkable  men.  The  church 
grew  in  spite  of  the  fanatical  scenes  connected  with  the  re- 
vivals which  swept  over  the  State  during  the  earlier  years  of 
the  present  century,  and  which  occupy  a prominent  place  in 
the  religious  history  of  that  period. 

In  Tennessee  Presbyterianism  began  about  1785,  and  its  his- 
tory is  not  very  unlike  that  in  Kentucky.  Some  of  the  offen- 

( New  Series,  No.  22.) 


29 


454  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.  [July. 

sive  extravagances  of  the  great  revival  in  the  latter  State  were 
said  to  have  been  imported  from  Tennessee. 

Without  proposing  to  name  all  the  men  who  were  influential 
in  these  States,  it  is  sufficient  to  remark  that  in  both  there 
were  men  of  very  great  ability,  and  that  they  gave  to  Presby- 
terianism a hold  there  which  it  still  retains.  And  further,  the 
extravagant  outbreaks  of  religious  fanaticism  seemed  to  have 
spent  themselves,  or  to  have  been  corrected,  before  the  pio- 
neers from  that  region  came  to  this  State.  In  other  words, 
the  very  best  force  of  these  religious  movements  had  been 
preserved  for  use  in  our  own  State.  The  wisdom,  piety  and 
preaching  power  of  Doak  and  Blackburn,  in  Tennessee,  and 
Craighead,  Marshall,  Allen,  Blythe,  Cleland,  Campbell,  Cam- 
eron, and  others,  in  Kentucky,  did  much  to  prepare  the  way 
for  the  introduction  of  Presbyterianism  into  the  new  regions 
north  of  the  Ohio. 

The  influence  of  the  Old  Redstone  Presbytery  is  at  once 
seen,  even  before  the  close  of  the  last  century,  in  the  pioneer 
work  in  Ohio  in  1799,  when  the  Rev.  James  Hughes  began  his 
labor  in  Eastern  Ohio,  at  Mt.  Pleasant.  In  1802  the  Rev. 
James  Snodgrass  began  his  pastorate  at  Steubenville.  Mean- 
while “ Father  Rice,”  in  1790,  had  organized  the  first  Presby- 
terian church  in  Cincinnati,  but  it  was  not  able  to  build  for 
itself  a house  of  worship  until  1792.  The  Presbytery  of  Wash- 
ington— the  first  north  of  the  Ohio — was  organized  in  1799,  but 
in  1802  it  included  only  five  pastors  and  thirty-two  congrega- 
tions. If  now  we  trace  the  history  of  Presbyterianism  in  Ohio 
down  to  the  date  of  our  own  Synod  in  1826,  we  shall  find  that  to 
a large  extent  its  ministers  were  either  directly  from  Kentucky, 
or  the  Redstone.  To  this  general  statement  there  are  many 
exceptions,  especially  in  the  northern  part  of  Ohio,  where  the 
New  England  element  expressed  itself  in  its  relations  to  our 
church  in  “ the  Plan  of  Union.”  The  sterner  type  of  Presby- 
terianism which  Dr.  Joshua  L.  Wilson  of  Cincinnati,  Dr.  Robert 
G.  Nelson  of  Chillicothe,  and  Dr.  James  Hoge  of  Columbus  rep- 
resented, fairly  embodied  the  views  of  the  great  body  of  our 
church  in  the  south  half  of  the  State  and  the  eastern  counties, 
of  which  Steubenville  was  a center.  The  church  had  made 
great  progress  in  numbers  and  material  strength.  It  held  pro- 
tracted meetings,  sacramental  meetings,  and  even  camp-meet- 


*8  77-] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


455 


ings,  quite  similar  to  those  which  occurred  in  the  ministry  of 
McMillan  of  Western  Pennsylvania,  and  Cleland  of  Kentucky. 
Our  church  in  that  State  then  had  possession  of  the  two  State 
Universities  at  Athens  and  Oxford,  at  both  of  which  places 
many  were  educated  for  her  ministry.  It,  in  a word,  was  a 
great  power  in  Ohio. 

We  have  thus  sketched  in  a very  general  outline  the  several 
religious  antecedents  of  the  Synod  of  Indiana.  In  the  eastern 
portions  of  the  country  there  was  the  extraordinary  outpour- 
ing of  God’s  Spirit  as  the  last  century  closed,  and  repeatedly 
during  the  first  quarter  of  the  present  century.  The  same  was 
true  of  Virginia,  Western  Pennsylvania,  Kentucky,  Tennessee, 
and  Ohio.  It  might  be  rash  to  assert  that  in  these  new  re- 
gions our  church  grew  faster  and  more  vigorously  than  other 
churches.  It  is  enough  to  say  that  in  spite  of  the  sparseness 
.and  the  poverty  of  the  people,  and  the  occasional  outbreak  of 
fanaticism,  as  in  Tennessee  and  Kentucky,  the  Presbyterian 
Church  had  a vigorous  growth,  as  the  Assembly’s  minutes  and 
•other  authorities  prove.  These  regions  were  invested  from 
:the  very  first  with  all  the  interest  of  romance,  and  attracted  to 
themselves  multitudes  of  people  who  easily  adopted  our  faith 
and  polity.  But  whatever  we  may  say  of  these  regions  in  this 
.respect,  we  find  the  antecedents  of  our  Indiana  Presbyterian- 
ism to  have  been  of  the  type  of  the  original  Synod  of  New 
York  and  Philadelphia,  of  Virginia,  the  Old  Redstone,  and 
Kentucky.  Northern  Ohio  was  powerfully  affected  by  the  di- 
rect emigration  of  New  Englanders,  and  also  that  of  Central 
and  Western  New  York.  About  the  time  the  Connecticut  Mis- 
sionary Society,  and  then  the  American  Home  Missionary  So- 
ciety, began  to  send  out  in  large  numbers  the  graduates  of 
New  England  colleges  and  seminaries,  many  of  the  churches 
in  the  western  half  of  Ohio,  as  well  as  on  the  Reserve,  were 
modified  into  a type  that  did  not  harmonize  at  once  with  the 
other  type  just  named.  But  in  either  case  it  was  strongly  im- 
bued with  the  revival  spirit  that  frequently  shook  with  Pente- 
, costal  power  the  churches  of  our  order,  East  and  West  and 
.South,  during  the  half-century  1783-1830.  It  is  a record  of 
.antecedents  of  which  our  Synod  has  no  reason  to  be  ashamed. 

We  now  reach  the  part  of  our  narrative  that  pertains  to  the 
.planting  and  growth  of  our  church  to  the  communities  north 


45^  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.  [Jiilyr 

of  the  Ohio.  In  1787  Dr.  Manasseh  Cutler  had  negotiated 
with  Congress  for  the  purchase  of  several  millions  of  acres,  in- 
eluding  the  tract  of  the  “ Ohio  Company,”  in  the  region  of 
Marietta,  and  that  of  Judge  Symmes  in  the  Miami  country. 
On  the  7th  of  April,  1788,  Gen.  Rufus  Putnam,  with  forty-seven 
men,  most  of  whom  were  Revolutionary  soldiers,  landed  at 
Marietta;  on  the  13th  of  July  Governor  St.  Clair,  by  procla- 
mation, defined  the  boundaries  of  Washington  county,  the  first 
in  territory  of  the  Northwest ; “ on  the  20th  of  July  the  Rev. 
William  Breck,  a New  England  man,  and  one  of  the  Ohio 
Company,  delivered  on  the  banks  of  the  Muskingum  the  first 
sermon  ever  preached  to  white  men  in  the  present  State  of 
Ohio” ; and  on  the  2d  of  September,  with  religious  and  civic 
ceremonies  of  an  imposing  character,  the  first  Court  of  Com- 
mon Pleas  was  opened  at  Marietta.  On  this  occasion  Dr. 
Cutter  officiated  as  chaplain. 

As  this  eminent  clergyman  and  scientist  was  on  his  way  to 
the  Muskingum  in  August,  1788,  he  had  met  Judge  John 
Cleves  Symmes,  at  Bedford,  Pa.,  on  his  way  with  his  family 
and  some  colonists  to  the  Miami.  The  advance  guard,  under 
Matthias  Denman,  of  New  Jersey,  reached  Cincinnati  in  De- 
cember of  this  year,  Symmes  himself  not  getting  there  until 
the  following  February. 

While  the  New  Englanders,  under  the  lead  of  Putnam,  at- 
tacked the  wilderness  of  the  Northwest  at  Marietta,  and  the 
New  Jersey  colonists,  under  Symmes,  attacked  it  at  Cincinnati, 
other  brigades  of  colonists  were  subduing  the  Genesee  country. 
From  1761  to  1788  the  Moravians,  on  the  Muskingum  and  on 
the  Cuyahoga,  were  striving  to  introduce  Christian  institutions 
among  the  savages.  While  several  sales  of  lands  on  the 
Western  Reserve  were  effected  by  Connecticut  as  early  as 
1788,  and  to  the  Connecticut  Land  Company  in  1795,  the  first 
permanent  settlement  in  Northern  Ohio  was  not  effected  until 
1796.  How  difficult  of  access  all  these  regions  north  of  the 
Ohio  were  may  be  inferred  from  the  length  of  time  consumed 
by  the  various  bands  of  colonists  to  Marietta,  Cincinnati,  and 
Cleveland.  Whittlesey  says  that  “ for  thirty  years  before  1788 
rude  highways  had  been  in  existence  over  the  ridges  of  t+ie 
Allegheny  Mountains,  made  by  Braddock  and  Forbes,  to  the 
forks  of  the  Ohio  at  Pittsburgh.  From  thence  they  could 


1877.] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


457 


float  onward  with  the  stream”;  but  in  1798  Edwards  and 
Doane  were  ninety-two  days  on  their  journey  from  Connecti- 
cut to  Cleveland.  James  Kingsbury  reached  Conneaut  in  the 
fall  of  1796,  by  a journey  very  tedious  and  even  perilous,  and 
such  were  the  straits  of  his  family  that  during  the  following 
winter,  the  snow  being  too  deep  for  the  oxen,  “ he  was  obliged 
to  drag  a hand-sled  to  Erie — thirty  miles — and  obtaining  a 
bushel  of  wheat  to  draw  it  himself  to  Conneaut.”  Atwater 
says  that  “ Kingsbury  and  his  hired  man  drew  a barrel  of  beef 
the  whole  distance  at  a single  load.”* 

To  reach  the  new  country  under  the  most  favorable  circum- 
stances during  the  first  twenty-five  years  after  the  military 
colonists  landed  at  Marietta,  in  1788,  was  a tedious  and  some- 
times dangerous  undertaking.  Dr.  Cutter,  in  the  summer  of 
1788,  took  about  six  weeks  to  travel  by  sulky  and  canoe  from 
Massachusetts  to  Marietta,  and  the  late  Mrs.  Judge  Burnet, as 
did  many  other  ladies,  repeatedly  made  the  journey  from  New 
York  to  Cincinnati  on  horseback.  To  reach  the  great  valley, 
in  those  days  was  no  child’s  play,  and  even  at  a later  day, 
during  the  existence  of  the  first  bank  in  Chillicothe,  so  slow 
were  the  public  conveyances  and  so  bad  the  roads,  that  a man 
who  was  offered  a large  reward  to  get  to  Philadelphia  in  time 
to  stop  the  payment  of  a draft  fraudulently  obtained,  preferred 
to  make  the  journey  on  foot,  and  actually  did  so,  obtaining 
the  reward ! 

According  to  Judge  Law,  the  French  had  effected  settle- 
ments, as  trading  and  military  posts,  both  at  Kaskaskia  and 
Vincennes,  “ as  early  as  the  year  1710  or  ’11 — probably  the 
former.” — (Law’s  Vincennes,  p.  12.)  In  1796  Volney  found 
not  only  the  French  people  at  the  latter  place,  but  “ new 
settlers  from  the  neighboring  States.”  In  1798  there  were 
twelve  families  of  these  new  settlers  in  the  place,  and  in  1799 
Col.  Henry  Vanderburgh,  an  old  army  officer,  and  a citizen  of 
Vincennes,  was  a member  of  the  Legislative  Council,  which 
constituted  the  upper  house  of  the  first  Territorial  Legislature 
that  met  north  of  the  Ohio.  The  following  year  the  territory 
of  Indiana  was  organized,  including  all  that  now  constitutes 
the  States  of  Indiana,  Michigan  and  Illinois.  In  1804  an  im- 


Whittlesey’s  Cleveland,  p.  264 ; Howe’s  Ohio,  p.  39. 


458 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.. 


[July-, 


mense  portion  of  the  Louisiana  purchase  west  of  the  Missis- 
sippi was  added  to  it.  Dillon  says  the  entire  Territory  in 
1800  was  estimated  to  have  a civilized  population  of  4,875.  In 
1808  this  immense  region  had  about  28,000,.  of  whom  some 
11,000  were  within  the  present  State  of  Indiana.  In  1807,. 
according  to  Dillon,  there  were  in  Indiana  “ 2,524  free  white 
males,  of  twenty-one  years  and  upward.”  Of  these  2,516  were 
in  the  south  quarter  of  the  State,  or  south  of  a line  connecting 
Lawrenceburg  and  Vincennes. 

The  General  Assembly  of  Virginia  had  granted  Gen.  Geo. 
Rogers  Clarke,  and  the  men  who  assisted  him  in  the  capture  of 
Vincennes  and  other  French  posts^450,ooo  acres  of  land, which 
are  chiefly  in  Clarke  County,  Indiana,  and  in  1783  passed  an 
act  establishing  Clarksville  at  the  Falls  of  the  Ohio,  a few 
miles  above  New  Albany.  In  1801  Clarke  County  was  estab- 
lished. In  a private  letter  the  indefatigable  historian  of 
Indiana,  John  B.  Dillon,  states  that  “ the  earlier  civilized  settle- 
ments within  the  original  boundaries  of  Clarke  County  were, 
without  an  exception,  founded  on  the  borders  of  the  Ohio 
river.  A few  soldiers  were  stationed  at  a small  fort  that  was 
erected  at  the  site  of  Jeffersonville  before  the  year  1789,  and  a 
block-house,  which  bore  the  name  of  ‘ Armstrong’s  Station,’ 
was  built  in  1795  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Ohio,  about  seven- 
teen miles  above  the  Falls.  Clarksville  was  a small  village  in 
1808,  and  in  the  year  1810  the  only  villages  on  the  lndiana  side 
of  the  river,  between  the  Miami  and  the  Wabash,  were  Law- 
renceburg, Madison,  Jeffersonville,  and  Clarksville.  Charles- 
town, in  Clarke  County,  and  Corydon  in  Harrison,  were  both 
founded  about  1808.  Very  few  of  the  founders  of  these  vil- 
lages were  from  New  England.  The  most  of  them  came  from 
Virginia,  Kentucky  and  North  Carolina,  and  a few  from 
Pennsylvania.” 

In  1791  eight  men,  bearing  the  name  of  Hayes,  and  two 
named  Miller,  settled  in  the  Miami  bottom,  near  Lawrence- 
burg. In  1796,  and  again  in  1798,  other  families  came  to 
Dearborn  County,  so  that  in  1800  the  settlements  there  were 
quite  strong.  At  Rising  Sun,  in  Ohio  County,  adjoining  Dear- 
born, we  learn  from  a discourse  by  Lthe  Rev.  B.  F.  Morris,, 
that  in  1798  emigrants  began  to  find  homes  at  that  pleasant 
spot  on  the  Ohio.  From  a remark  of  Ferret  Dufour,  in  his 


i877-] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


459 


history  of  the  “ Early  Times  in  Switzerland  County,”  it  may 
be  inferred  that  the  earliest  date  of  settlement  there  was  1797, 
although  John  James  Dufour  did  not  begin  at  Vevay  until 
1798. 

It  is  very  probable  that  emigrants  had  settled  at  other  points 
on  the  river  than  those  mentioned  before  1808,  where  Madison 
was  located.  The  Indiana  Gazetteer  of  1849  says:  “ The  first 
settlements  of  any  consequence  were  made  from  1790  to  1800 
in  the  towns  along  the  river,  so  that  the  inhabitants,  on  the 
first  notice  of  the  approach  of  the  Indians,  might  escape  into 
Kentucky.” — ( Ind . Gaz.,  for  1849,  P-  l92-) 

We  have  the  following  dates,  which  belong  to  this  sketch  : 
The  first  settlement  at  Vincennes  was  about  1710  or  T 1,  and 
American  settlers  at  the  same  place  about  1795  ; in  1789  there 
was  a small  military  post  at  Jeffersonville,  and  from  1791  to 
1800  settlements  were  made  at  Lawrenceburg,  Rising  Sun, 
Vevay,  “ Armstrong’s  Station,”  and  probably  at  some  other 
points  on  the  Ohio.  In  1808  such  points  as  Madison,  Corydon, 
and  Charlestown  were  settled.  In  1800  the  Territory  was  or- 
ganized. The  first  county — Knox — was  organized  in  1790,  the 
second — Clarke — 1801,  Dearborn  County  in  1802,  and  Harrison 
in  1808.  “A  court  of  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction  was 
organized  at  Vincennes,  June,  1779” — the  first  after  the  con- 
quest by  Clarke,  and  on  the  4th  of  November,  1790,  “the 
judges  of  the  Superior  Court  of  the  Northwest  Territory”  ap- 
pointed regular  times  for  holding  courts  at  Vincennes. — 
(Dillon  169-297.)  “ The  first  school-teacher  in  Indiana,  of 

whom  we  have  any  account,  was  M.  Rivet,  a Romish  priest  at 
Vincennes,  who  opened  a school  at  that  place  in  1793.  The 
second  school  was  near  Charlestown,  in  Clarke  County,  in  1803. 
— (Daniel  Hough,  in  Schools  of  Indiana,  pp.  53-4.)  And  on 
the  4th  of  July,  1804,  Elihu  Stout  published  at  Vincennes 
The  Indiana  Gazette , the  first  newspaper  within  the  present 
bounds  of  Indiana,  Michigan,  and  Illinois. — (Law’s  Vincennes, 
p.  138.) 

It  is  said  that  in  1804  the  Rev.  Peter  Cartwright  preached 
the  first  discourse  ever  delivered  by  a Protestant  minister  in 
Indiana.  In  the  spring  of  1805  the  Rev.  Thomas  Cleland 
preached  the  first  Presbyterian  sermon  at  Vincennes.  So  far 
as  we  know,  this  was  the  first  delivered  in  Indiana. 


460  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers . [July, 

The  Territory  of  Indiana  had  been  organized  six  years  when 
the  Rev.  Samuel  B.  Robertson  formed  the  first  Presbyterian 
church  within  the  present  bounds  of  this  State.  This  was  the 
“ Indiana  Church,”  not  far  from  Vincennes.  In  1807  a second 
church  was  formed,  which  did  not  live  long.  If  this  weakling, 
that  long  since  died,  be  excepted,  the  second  church  formed 
was  at  Charlestown  in  1812.  From  this  time  until  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Synod  of  Indiana,  in  the  autumn  of  1826,  the 
growth  of  our  church  was  not  very  rapid,  but  it  was  healthy. 
The  new  Synod  included  forty  churches,  among  which  may  be 
named  that  at  Washington,  1814,  Madison,  1815,  Salem,  New 
Albany,  Livonia,  Blue  River  and  Pisgah,  1816,  Bloomington, 
1819,  Hanover,  1820,  Evansville,  1821,  Indianapolis,  1823, 
Crawfordsville,  Franklin  and  Columbia,  1824,  and  several 
others.  Among  the  ministers  who  had  preached  statedly  or 
occasionally  we  find  the  names  of  Samuel  B.  Robertson,  Sam- 
uel T.  Scott,  Joseph  B.  Lapsley,  John  Todd,  John  M.  Dickey, 
William  Robinson,  Thomas  C.  Searle,  James  McGrady,  James 

H.  Johnston,  William  W.  Martin,  Daniel  C.  Banks,  James 
Balch,  John  F.  Crowe,  Isaac  Reed,  Baynard  R.  Hall,  Charles 
C.  Beatty,  David  C.  Proctor,  George  Bush,  Samuel  G.  Lowry, 
and  quite  a large  number  besides. 

Until  1824  the  Transylvania  Presbytery  of  Kentucky  in- 
cluded Indiana.  On  the  first  of  April  of  that  year  the  Pres- 
bytery of  Salem  was  formed,  the  first  in  Indiana,  and  was  at- 
tached to  the  Synod  of  Kentucky.  According  to  the  Salem 
Presbytery  Reporter , there  were  seven  ministers  in  it,  and  Gil- 
let  t adds,  “ most  of  the  churches  in  the  State.”  In  1825  the 
original  Presbytery  was  divided  into  the  three  Presbyteries  of 
Salem,  Madison  and  Wabash,  the  aggregate  strength  of  which 
amounted  to  fourteen  ministers  and  forty-three  churches. 
(Dickey’s  Brief  History,  21).  The  Assembly’s  minutes  for 
1826  illustrate  the  weakness  of  the  churches  at  that  time.  The 
eleven  churches  of  Salem  Presbytery  had  a total  of  478  com- 
municants ; the  thirteen  churches  of  Madison  Presbytery  had 
536  communicants  ; and  there  was  no  report  from  the  churches 
of  Wabash  Presbytery.  From  what  we  know  of  these  churches, 
we  shall  do  no  injustice  in  saying  that  the  entire  membership 
of  all  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  Indiana  did  not  exceed 

I, 500. 


1 877.]  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.  461 

By  the  time  the  Synod  was  formed,  October  18,  1826,  some 
changes  had  been  effected.  Our  first  church  had  been  formed 
in  1806,  and  after  that  such  towns  as  Madison,  Charlestown, 
Corydon,  Evansville,  New  Albany,  Princeton,  Terre  Haute, 
Crawfordsville,  Lafayette,  Indianapolis,  Columbus,  Franklin, 
and  some  others  had  been  settled.  The  Territorial  capital 
had  been  removed  from  Vincennes  to  Corydon  in  1813.  In 
1816  Indiana  was  admitted  into  the  Union.  In  1820  Indian 
apolis  was  located,  and  in  1825  became  the  capital  of  the 
State.  The  population,  from  about  11,000  in  1807,  had  in- 
creased to  about  250,000  in  1826. 

And  yet  this  new  country  was  not  very  attractive  in  many 
respects.  The  author  of  the.  Indiana  Gazetteer  for  1849,  refer- 
ring  to  the  transfer  of  the  State  capital  from  Corydon  to  Indian- 
apolis in  1825,  says  it  required  ten  days  to  perform  the  journey 
of  only  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  miles  ; and,  moreover, 
that  “ on  two  occasions,  after  hours  of  weary  travel,  the  writer 
had  found  himself  very  unwillingly  at  his  starting-place  of  the 
morning  ; and  his  good  friends,  the  present  Postmaster  at  In- 
dianapolis, and  the  Auditor  of  State,  after  a day’s  travel,  as 
they  thought,  toward  Cincinnati,  were  back  at  their  own  town, 
which  they  took  for  some  unknown  settlement  in  the  wilder- 
ness. And  another  traveler  from  Ohio,  when  asked  if  he  had 
been  through  Indiana,  replied  that  he  could  not  tell  with  cer- 
tainty, but  he  thought  he  had  been  pretty  nearly  through  it  in 
some  places ! ” 

Although  emigration  was  making  inroads  into  the  northern 
half  of  the  State,  the  most  of  the  population  was  thinly  scat- 
tered over  the  southern  half,  and,  according  to  Dillon,  the 
most  of  it  was  from  the  slave  States  ; and  in  spite  of  the  or- 
dinance of  1787,  there  were  in  Indiana  nearly  200  slaves  in 
1826.  As  for  the  condition  of  the  country,  we  may  learn  it 
from  the  statements  of  those  who  visited  it  in  early  times. 

In  1822  the  Rev.  John  Ross  made  a missionary  tour  from 
the  Miami  valley  to  Fort  Wayne,  and  he  describes  the  jour- 
ney. One  night  the  wolves  howled  about  their  little  encamp- 
ment, and  when  not  far  from  their  destination  they  were  met 
by  a terrible  snow  storm  ; their  wagon  wheels  were  frozen  fast 
in  the  mud  ; they  sought  in  vain  to  light  a fire,  and  at  last, 
leaving  their  wagon  with  its  contents  in  the  care  of  a dog, 


462 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


[July, 


they  made  their  way  to  Fort  Wayne,  reaching-  it  late  at  night. 
And  yet,  the  brave  man,  the  next  day  being  the  Sabbath, 
preached  twice  in  the  Fort.  Between  1822  and  1826  he  made 
five  such  missionary  tours  to  Fort  Wayne. — ( Williams'  Fort 
Wayne , 13). 

This  venerable  patriarch  passed  away  at  Tipton,  Indiana, 
March  1 1,  1876,  aged  ninety-two  years,  having  spent  more  than 
half  a century"  in  the  ministry"  in  this  State  and  Ohio.  His 
history  is  one  of  singular  interest,  and  his  ministerial  life  was 
crowned  with  unusual  success. 

When  Dr.  Post  reached  Logansport,  Christmas  day,  1829,  it 
was  “ a town  of  thirty  or  forty  families — a community  number- 
ing between  two  and  three  hundred.  Dispersed  in  the  coun- 
try were  eight  or  ten  log  cabins,  holding  the  entire  residue  of 
Cass  county.  We  were  literally  on  the  confines  where  civil- 
ized man  had  overtaken  the  savage,  and  they  had  stopped  for 
a day  and  struck  hands.  . . . Wild  forest  and  prairie,  un- 

occupied by  the  white  man,  stretched  away  westward  over  Il- 
linois to  ‘ the  Father  of  Waters,’ and  in  the  direction  of  the 
Great  Lakes  to  an  almost  indefinite  expanse ; toward  the 
rising  sun,  and  the  remote  southeast  and  south  were  spread 
out  ‘ the  solemn  woods.’  Some  rude  fixtures  of  the  French 
trader  were  found  at  long  intervals  on  the  large  water-courses. 
On  nearly  every  side  lay  a wide  extent  of  unorganized  terri- 
tory". and  all  around  was  a dark,  massy  solitude.  Out  of  Fort 
Wayne  and  Logansport  there  were  not  in  Indiana,  north  of 
the  Wabash,  300  inhabitants.  From  several  points  of  the  com- 
pass a traveler,  day  after  day,  might  have  taken  his  course  in 
a direct  line  to  this  place  without  his  eye  being  cheered  with 
even  the  roughest  quarters  of  the  backwoodsman.”  He  de- 
scribes his  journey  in  December,  1829,  from  Madison  to 
Logansport  on  horseback,  requiring  nine  days  of  hard  rid- 
ing, “ with  roads  which  were  almost  a continuous  morass — 
long,  weary  miles  of  a deep,  half-liquid  compound  of  earth, 
water,  snow,  and  ice — roads  without  bridges,  high  waters, 
impassable  fords,  and  with  ‘swimming  horse,’  and  sometimes 
his  rider,  too,  through  full  angry  currents.” — (. Post's  Retro- 
spect, 9,  10.) 

If  we  had  time  to  cull  hints  and  more  positive  statements 
from  various  sources  within  reach,  we  should  find  that  Indiana, 


1 877.]  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.  463, 

although  ten  years  a State  in  1826,  was  a vast  wilderness  that 
was  only  just  beginning  to  tremble  before  the  axe  of  the  pio- 
neer. In  1822  that  truly  able  man,  the  late  Mr.  John  Beard, 
found  only  one  cabin  between  Indianapolis  and  the  cabin  or 
two  built  at  Crawfordsville.  And  that  very  year  Mr.  Charles 
Beatty,  now  our  venerable  patriarch  at  Steubenville,  riding 
from  Terre  Haute  to  Crawfordsville,  to  preach  the  first  sermon 
there,  and  to  perform  the  first  marriage  in  the  county,  encoun- 
tered several  wolves  near  where  the  village  of  Warrland  now 
is,  and  performed  both  the  religious  services  referred  to  in  an 
unfloored  cabin  which  had  not  even  a door.  The  bridegroom 
of  that  Sabbath,  hearing  that  a minister  was  to  be  there,  had 
gone  the  week  before  to  Indianapolis  to  get  his  license — the 
eleventh  issued  in  Marion  county — and  the  journey  required 
nearly  four  days’  hard  riding,  although  the  distance  was  only 
a little  more  than  forty  miles. 

As  late  as  1829,  Dr.  Thomson,  our  missionary  in  Syria,  took 
three  hard  days’  riding  to  make  that  same  journey  one  way. 
And  even  as  late  as  1834,  a member  of  one  of  the  Wabash  Col- 
lege families  was  two  days  in  the  stage-coach  going  from  Craw- 
fordsville to  Lafayette,  and  thence  made  the  journey  by 
steamers  down  the  Wabash  and  up  the  Ohio,  and  thence  by 
stage-coach  to  New  Hampshire.  Chicago  was  a trading  post, 
to  which  farmers  in  Central  Indiana  hauled  their  wheat,  ex- 
changing a load  of  it  for  a barrel  or  two  of  salt.  The  hogs  of 
Indiana  were  driven  to  Louisville  and  Cincinnati  for  market  at 
ruinously  small  prices ; and  the  cattle  and  horses  were  driven 
over  the  mountains  to  Eastern  markets  by  journeys  so  long  and 
expensive  that  the  producers  had  but  little  left  them  when  the 
expenses  were  paid. 

As  an  illustration  of  the  times,  it  may  be  added  that  Maj. 
Ambrose  Whitelock,  for  several  years  land  receiver  at  Craw- 
fordsville, was  accustomed  to  put  in  kegs  the  specie  he  received 
for  lands,  and  to  send  large  sums  of  money  in  this  shape  by  a 
teamster  without  guard  to  Louisville,  a distance  of  nearly  two 
hundred  miles.  In  one  case  the  wagon  was  upset  and  one  or 
more  of  the  kegs  burst.  The  man  gathered  up  the  shining 
treasures  and  delivered  the  whole  safely  to  the  Government 
office  at  Louisville. 

While  the  local  history  of  Indiana  has  received  no  very 


464 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


[July, 


general  attention,  there  are  a few  historical  discourses  which 
abound  in  sketches  of  the  State  as  it  was  fifty  years  ago.* 

Dr.  Beatty,  in  1822,  missionated  from  Vincennes  to  Craw- 
fordsville,  but  he  found  only  here  and  there  a settlement.  That 
indefatigable  itinerant  and  organizer  of  churches,  the  Rev. 
Isaac  Reed,  everywhere  found  himself  in  the  wilderness,  ex- 
cept as  occasionally  he  emerged  into  the  small  settlements 
that  were  indeed  “few  and  far  between.”  The  pioneer  was 
raising  his  axe  against  the  forest,  but  as  yet  he  had  made 
little  impression.  It  was  still  a “massy  solitude.” 

In  his  fine  paper  on  the  history  of  the  first  Presbyterian 
Church  in  Franklin,  Judge  Banta  presents  to  us  the  picture  of 
the  first  party  that  settled  at  that  point  in  1823,  “wearied  and 
foot-sore,”  and  forced  to  camp  out  for  the  night  ; and  such  were 
the  trials  from  deep  mud,  undrained  swamps  and  dense  forests, 
that  “we  may  well  imagine  that  it  was  in  many  instances  a very 
struggle  for  life.” — (Pres.  Ch.,  Franklin,  122-5.)  1°  1824  Rev. 

Baynard  R.  Hall,  in  describing  Bloomington,  says  that  “east 
of  it  was  an  uninhabited  wilderness  for  forty  miles.”  And  as 
early  as  1829,  when  the  Rev.  David  Montfort  went  with  his 
family  from  Oxford,  Ohio,  to  Terre  Haute,  the  journey  of  160 
miles  was  “through  an  almost  unbroken  forest.” 

Mr.  Reed,  in  1827,  describes  some  of  the  largest  towns  in  the 
State.  Madison  and  Charleston  had  about  1,200 people  each; 
Jeffersonville,  800;  Vincennes,  1,000;  Terre  Haute — “a  hand- 
some little  village  of  white  buildings” — 300 ; Bloomington, 
400;  Indianapolis,  800.  It  has  “a  well-finished  meeting-house 
and  settled  minister,”  and  “the  attention  to  good  order  and  to 
religion  is  favorable.”  Mr.  Reed  did  not  see  much  in  the 
common  schools  to  praise,  and  the  State  has  “many  men  and 
women  who  cannot  read  at  all.”  But  there  was  much  “ true 
hospitality.  There  is  much  equality  among  the  people.  * * 

A man  is  an  idle  and  lazy  fellow  if  he  does  not  soon  get  a 
farm  of  his  own.  Money  is  scarce  and  provisions  low.  It  is 
very  easy  to  lay  out  money,  but  very  hard  to  get  it  back  again.” 


*The  sketch  of  Fort  Wayne  by  Jesse  L.  Williams,  Dr.  Post’s  Retrospect,  Wil- 
liamson Wright’s  Pioneer  of  Cass  County,  Judge  Santa’s  Franklin,  Father  John- 
ston’s Forty  Years’  Ministry  in  Indiana,  are  charming  specimens  of  our  local 
historical  literature.  There  are  books  and  documents  of  a similar,  kind  and 
value. 


i877-] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


465 


And  this  very  year  that  the  Synod  was  formed  Mr.  Reed 
describes  his  journey  out  of  Indiana  in  the  month  of  May. 
He  speaks  £)f  leaving  Indianapolis  and  “entering  the  woods 
on  the  road  to  Centerville.”  It  is  difficult  to  realize,  as  we  are 
now  whirled  so  easily  over  the  railway  between  the  two  points 
named,  the  sorrows  of  our  pioneer  on  his  way  to  happier 
regions  at  the  East.  One  day  he  only  traveled  thirteen  miles. 
At  some  places  he  found  the  high  waters  had  made  great  con- 
fusion among  the  log  causeways,  floating  the  logs  in  every 
direction.  Often  the  mud  was  so  deep  that  his  wife  had  to 
get  out  and  make  her  way  on  foot,  while  he  “ led  the  horse  by 
the  check  rein,  walking  before  him,  and  frequently  with  the 
mud  and  water  as  deep  and  deeper  than  his  boots  !”  On  the 
fourth  day  he  passed  through  Centerville,  sixty  miles  from 
Indianapolis. 

To  go  from  Owen  county,  in  this  State,  to  Essex  county,  in 
New  York,  had  taken  Mr.  Reed  “ eight  weeks  and  a day.” — 
(Reed’s  Christian  Traveler,  222-233,  etc.) 

These  facts  are  mentioned  as  affording  glimpses  of  Indiana 
as  it  was  fifty  years  ago.  It  was  on  the  frontier,  or  nearly  so, 
and  it  was  famous  for  the  obstacles  which  hindered  rapid  loco- 
motion. Goods  were  wagoned  from  the  Ohio,  or  brought  up 
the  White  or  the  Wabash,  with  great  labor  and  cost.  The  pro- 
duce of  the  country  was  worth  little  on  account  of  the  distance 
of  the  markets  and  the  difficulty  of  reaching  them.  We  can 
hardly  do  honor  to  the  pioneer  work  of  those  who  organized 
our  first  Synod  without  thus  recalling  the  Indiana  of  half  a 
century  ago,  so  different  from  the  Indiana  of  to-day. 

The  small  numbers  and  strength  of  our  church  have  already 
been  referred  to,  and  it  will  be  readily  seen  how  small  the  fig- 
ures are  in  comparison  with  the  present  ; but  Father  Johnston, 
in  his  delightful  “ Forty  Years’  Ministry  in  Indiana,”  says  that 
the  Salem  Presbytery  in  1825,  within  eight  months,  “held  no 
less  than  eight  distinct  meetings  at  points  remote  from  each 
other.  * * * In  performing  these  laborious  and  self-deny- 

ing duties,  so  important  in  their  bearing  on  the  spiritual 
interests  of  our  State,  these  fathers  and  brethren  spent  weeks 
of  precious  time  and  traveled  many  hundred  miles.  * * * 

At  that  time  traveling  was  for  the  most  part  on  horseback,  and 
often  with  no  little  difficulty  even  in  that  way.  But  labor  and 


466 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


[July, 


toil  and  difficulty  did  not  deter  those  indefatigable  pioneers 
from  the  full  discharge  of  the  duties,  which  the  circumstances 
in  which  they  were  placed  required  at  their  hands.” 

The  Rev.  Isaac  Reed  says — “My  travels  in  Indiana  in  1824 
were  2,480  miles.”  Now  he  is  at  Salem,  or  Charlestown  in  the 
far  south,  and  then  at  Indiamapolis  or  Crawfordsville,  and  anon 
at  Terre  Haute,  or  across  the  river  at  Paris  in  Illinois.  The 
first  licensure  was  at  Charlestown  in  1824,  and  the  first  ordina- 
tion at  Bloomington  in  1825.  In  this  last  year — 1825 — Reed 
says  “ there  were  six  ordinations  in  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  Indiana.”  He  attended  four  of  them  himself.  It  is  really 
wonderful  to  note  this  man’s  journeys  on  horseback  through 
this  great  wilderness,  but  it  was  only  more  wonderful  than  the 
tours  of  other  “ preachers  of  the  Word  ” in  that  we  have  his 
record  of  what  he  did,  while  we  have  little  record  of  what  they 
did.  Such  men  as  Proctor,  and  Dickey,  and  Crowe,  and  Martin, 
and  Johnston,  and  others,  accomplished  numerous  long  jour- 
neys. Proctor  rode  regularly  fora  time  between  Bloomington 
and  Indianapolis.  Johnston  made  frequent  missionary  tours; 
Dickey  was  constantly  in  the  saddle,  riding  from  “ The  Pocket  ” 
to  “ Mouth  of  Eel”;  as  was  also  Crowe,  who  made  at  least  one 
extended  journey  through  Indiana  and  Illinois,  to  explore  the 
country  with  reference  to  the  planting  of  churches.  And  this 
was  only  a specimen  of  his  missionary  tours. 

These  missionary  scouts  were  soon  joined  by  others  as  brave — 
James  Thomson  of  Crawfordsville,  James  N.  Carnahan  of  Day- 
ton,  Martin  M.  Post  of  Logansport,  Edward  O.  Hovey  and 
Caleb  Mills,  of  Wabash  College,  David  Montfort  of  Franklin, 
and  many  others.  Montfort  was  a marvel  of  heroic  power  and 
enthusiasm,  who  on  account  of  his  crippled  condition  had  to 
be  lifted  on  and  off  his  horse,  and  yet  made  long  missionary 
journeys,  not  only  among  his  own  people,  but  in  the  State. 
Jesse  L.  Williams,  of  Fort  Wayne,  then  a young  surveyor, 
who  had  stopped  over  Sabbath  at  Knightstown,  heard  this 
resolute  and  able  man  preach  twice.  It  was  no  uncommon 
thing,  as  related  by  Dr.  Cleland  and  others,  for  these  mission- 
aries to  lose  their  way  in  the  woods,  or  to  be  overtaken  by 
night  far  from  any  habitation.  So  far  from  esteeming  the 
hardship  as  great,  they  felt  themselves  happy  if  they  had  flint 


1 877*]  Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers.  467 

and  tinder  with  which  to  kindle  a fire  both  for  warmth  and 
protection. 

Dr.  Post,  in  his  “ Retrospect,”  speaks  of  “ the  long  rides 
several  times  every  year  to  Presbyteries  and  Synods,  often  dis- 
tant from  sixty  to  two  hundred  miles,”  and  of  “ the  missionary 
excursions,”  even  as  far  as  the  Lake,  “ organizing  churches, 
preaching  and  exploring.” 

And  did  space  permit  it  would  not  be  difficult  to  cull  from 
many  sources  other  incidents,  which  show  how  great  were  the 
embarrassments  and  hardships  of  our  pioneer  ministers  in  this 
State.  And  yet  Dickey,  and  Martin,  and  Crowe,  and  Johnston, 
and  Carnahan,  and  their  worthy  peers,  could  have  adopted  as 
their  own  the  eloquent  words  of  Dr.  Post,  who  has  just  gone  to 
his  rest.  In  his“  Retrospect  ” he  said  : “ Nor  have  I regretted 
my  choice  of  a place.  Unworthy  to  serve  Christ  anywhere,  I 
have  found  here  reasons  for  attachment,  and  have  made  no 
sacrifices , none  which  can  be  mentioned , when  the  eye  is  fixed  on 
Gethseman#  and  Calvary." 

Father  Johnston,  in  his  “ Forty  Years’  Ministry,”  describes  the 
organization  of  the  Synod,  as  one  who  took  part  in  the  act, 
and  I quote  his  words.  After  showing  that  the  Presbytery  of 
Salem  had  been  divided  into  three,  as  already  referred  to,  he 
says  that  “ by  an  act  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church,  adopted  May  29th,  1826,  these  three  Presbyte- 
ries, together  with  the  Presbytery  of  Missouri,  were  constituted 
into  a synod  denominated  the  Synod  of  Indiana.  Agreeably 
to  the  appointment  of  the  General  Assembly,  this  Synod  held 
its  first  meeting  at  Vincennes  on  the  1 8th  day  of  October,  1826. 
There  were  present  at  that  meeting  eight  ministers  and  twelve 
ruling  elders.  Other  brethren  would  have  attended  had  they 
not  been  detained  at  their  homes  by  sickness.  The  following 
are  the  names  of  the  ministers  who  were  permitted  to  be  pres- 
ent at  that  first  synodical  meeting  ever  held  west  of  the  State 
of  Ohio  and  north  of  Mason  and  Dixon’s  line  : From  Salem 

Presbytery  but  one  minister  attended,  Tilly  H.  Brown;  from 
Wabash  Presbytery  there  were  three,  Samuel  T.  Scott,  George 
Bush  and  Baynard  R.  Hall;  Madison  Presbytery  furnished  the 
same  number,  John  M.  Dickey,  John  F.  Crowe  and  James  H. 
Johnston  ; from  Missouri  Presbytery,  which  included  the  whole 
State  of  Missouri,  the  only  minister  present  was  Salmon  Gid- 


468 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


[July, 


dings  of  St.  Louis;  while  from  Illinois,  whose  entire  territory- 
constituted  the  great  central  portion  of  the  Synod,  not  a soli- 
tary representative  appeared.” 

And  such  were  the  small  but  grand  beginnings  of  the  synod- 
ical organization,  which  included  nearly  all  there  was  of  Presby- 
terianism in  Indiana,  Illinois  and  Missouri,  not  to  speak  of 
Michigan,  with  all  the  West  and  Northwest.  On  the  territory 
defined  as  belonging  to  the  Synod  of  Indiana,  as  it  was  fifty 
years  ago,  with  its  four  feeble  presbyteries,  there  are  now  six 
synods  and  twenty-four  presbyteries,  including  seven  hundred 
and  fifty-eight  ministers,  nine  hundred  and  ninety-four  churches, 
and  seventy-eight  thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty  mem- 
bers. In  all  other  respects  the  growth  has  been  as  marked. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  carry  this  investigation  farther,  nor  to 
enter  into  details  at  any  great  length.  Indiana,  fifty  years  ago, 
was  described  in  the  Assembly’s  narrative  as  having  “ an  im- 
mense territory  lying  waste  without  laborers  to  cultivate  it. 
Now  and  then  a traveling  missionary  scatters  the  seed  of  the 
kingdom.”  And  yet  the  churches  in  these  vast  wastes  were  not 
only  few,  but  in  one  year  five  became  extinct  for  want  of  min- 
isters. The  General  Assembly  speaks  of  these  destitutions  in 
Indiana,  and  the  feeble  churches  dying  for  lack  of  ministers. 
And  was  it  so  strange  that  with  our  highest  judicature  saying 
officially,  “ they  are  our  brethren,  and  they  cry  to  us  for  help," 
that  such  a want  should  have  pressed  from  the  agonized  and 
beseeching  churches  in  the  wilderness  its  tzvo  Christian  colleges? 

Of  what  has  occurred  since  the  1 8th  of  October,  1826,  be  it 
bright  or  dark,  be  it  sweet  or  bitter,  be  it  of  the  nature  of  ag- 
gressive warfare  or  unfraternal  strife,  it  is  not  necessary  here  to 
speak.  In  the  reminiscences  of  those  times  there  is  much 
both  to  gladden  and  to  sadden  us ; many  things  we  could  wish 
were  undone  ; but,  on  the  whole,  we  shall  find  that  the  Presby 
terian  Church  has  made  progress  in  all  respects,  in  the  number 
of  its  churches  and  their  strength,  in  its  financial  and  moral 
power,  in  its  educational  institutions,  and  in  most  other  respects. 
There  are  now  single  churches  in  this  State  that  have  more 
wealth  than  all  our  churches  in  1826.  There  are  men,  not  a 
few,  who  commune  at  our  altars,  who  singly  can  endow  either 
of  our  colleges,  or  build  institutions  for  the  unfortunate.  We 
are  not  poor,  and  if  we  will,  we  can  overshadow  the  State  itself 


1877-] 


Presbyterianism  on  the  Frontiers. 


469 


by  the  magnitude  of  our  endowments  and  the  magnificence  of 
our  churches.  The  Synod  of  1826  was  weak  in  its  wealth  and 
its  constituency,  but  it  was  glorious  in  its  missionary  zeal  and 
self-denial.  The  Synod  of  1876,  inspired  with  the  spirit  of  the 
men  of  ’26,  have  numbers,  intelligence,  organization,  wealth, 
force  to  make  our  church  “ fair  as  the  moon,  clear  as  the  sun, 
and  terrible  as  an  army  with  banners.”  With  not  an  exception, 
the  ministers  who  met  in  Vincennes  just  fifty  years  ago,  are 
gone.  A year  ago  our  venerable  Johnston  was  the  sole  sur- 
vivor, but  he,  too,  has  fallen  asleep,  full  of  years  and  glory. 
Brown,  Scott,  Bush,  Hall,  Dickey,  Crowe  and  Giddings  had 
all  been  summoned  away,  and  Johnston  alone  lingered.  And 
now  he,  too,  has  taken  his  departure  to  join  the  fellowship  of 
the  saints  in  heaven.  And  if  we  add  another  decade,  bringing 
our  church  down  to  that  period  when  she  was  about  to  be  met 
by  divisions,  we  find  that  the  fathers  who  belonged  to  that  pio- 
neer period,  with  only  here  and  there  an  exception,  have  join- 
ed the  great  church  on  the  other  side  of  the  flood.  A few  men 
remain,  crowned  with  the  glories  of  long  service  in  this  field, 
like  Carnahan,  and  Hovey,  and  Mills,  and  Chase,  and  Henry 
Little,  and  Hawley,  and  Kent,  and  Stewart,  and  Scott.  But, 
one  by  one,  they  are  passing  away.  We  have  just  laid  in  his  own 
new  tomb  the  remains  of  our  St.  John,  our  dear  and  venerable 
Post,  and  also  our  patriarchal  Ross.  And  thus  they  pass  away 
into  the  heavens,  but  as  the  fathers  of  our  church — the  pio- 
neers— leave  to  us  the  work  they  so  well  begun  ; and  we  shall 
prove  our  admiration  of  them  by  carrying  forward  with  great  zeal 
and  power  the  work  they  loved  and  ennobled,  to  a glory  they 
never  dreamed  of. 


(New  Series,  No.  22.) 


30 


470 


Total  Depravity. 


[July, 


Art.  V.— TOTAL  DEPRAVITY. 

By  Henry  A.  Nelson,  D.  D.,  Geneva,  N.  Y. 

ASSUMING  that  human  nature,  as  found  in  every  individual 
specimen  of  it,  is  depraved,  the  degree  or  the  intensity  of  this 
depravation  becomes  a subject  of  serious  inquiry.  If  all  man- 
kind are  morally  and  spiritually  depraved,  to  what  extent,  or 
in  what  degree,  are  they  so?  If  we  must  confess  that  our 
human  depravity  is  universal,  must  we  couple  with  this  the 
confession  that  it  is  total  ? As  God’s  ambassadors  to  men, 
must  we  not  only  affirm  the  universal  depravity  of  mankind, 
but  must  we  also  insist  that  it  is  a total  depravity? 

In  the  very  beginning  of  such  an  inquiry  it  behooves  us  to 
remember  that  what  is  true  on  this  subject  is  likely  to  be  offen- 
sive to  those  of  whom  it  is  true — to  men  generally — to  our- 
selves. There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  mankind  are 
much  more  depraved  than  it  is  pleasant  to  them  to  believe  or 
to  be  told.  We  certainly  have  a natural  pride  which  repels 
the  imputation  of  depravity,  of  perverseness,  of  sin.  We 
ought  not  to  think  it  strange  if  the  natural  pride  of  our  hearts 
renders  it  difficult  to  accept  the  view  of  ourselves  which  our 
understandings  may  find  to  be  actually  given  in  the  Bible. 
This  liability  is  well  stated  by  Dr.  McCosh  : * “We  are 
afraid  to  examine  ourselves,  lest  humbling  disclosures  should  be 
made.  And  when  we  have  the  courage  to  examine  our  hearts, 
prejudice  dims  the  eyes,  vanity  distorts  the  objects  seen,  the 
treacherous  memory  brings  up  only  the  fair  and  flattering  side 
of  the  picture,  and  the  deceived  judgment  denies  the  sinful 
action,  explains  away  the  motives,  or  excuses  the  deed  in  the 
circumstances.” 

In  all  human  jurisprudence  this  liability  to  too  favorable 
judgment  of  ourselves  is  recognized  and  guarded  against. 
Nothing  could  be  proposed  which  would  universally  be  pro- 
nounced more  absurd  than  to  allow  any  man  a place  on  a jury 
whose  verdict  would  involve  a judgment  upon  his  own  charac- 
ter. All  literature,  and  all  conversation,  are  pervaded  by  the 
sentiment  that  no  power  has  gifted  us,  or  is  likely  to  gift  us, 
with  the  ability  “ to  see  ourselves  as  others  see  us,”  or  to  see 


*Divine  Government,  p.  362. 


IS77-] 


Total  Depravity . 


471 


ourselves  altogether  as  we  are.  It  clearly  is  our  duty  to  be 
carefully  on  our  guard  against  prejudice  in  favor  of  ourselves, 
while  we  study  the  question  now  proposed. 

The  teachers  of  religion  must  also  be  faithful  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Bible  as  they  find  it,  however  distasteful  it  may  be  to 
those  to  whom  they  are  sent.  The  surgeon  must  acquire  forti- 
tude to  cut  steadily  and  firmly,  undeterred  by  the  vvrithings  or 
the  cries  of  his  patient.  True  kindness  requires  this  of  him. 
On  the  other  hand,  no  doubt,  this  is  a subject  on  which  the 
truth  may  be  spoken  with  unnecessary  harshness  ; may  be  pre- 
sented in  a manner  and  in  language  needlessly  offensive. 
Thus  may  hearers  or  readers  be  prevented  from  attending  to 
truth,  which  it  is  necessary  for  them  to  receive  in  order  to  that 
conviction  of  sin  without  which  they  will  not  seek  the  Saviour. 

It  is  our  duty  to  understand  this  truth  so  thoroughly,  and  to 
learn  to  state  it  so  justly  and  so  well,  that,  on  the  one  hand,  we 
shall  not  needlessly  repel  men  from  the  consideration  of  it  ; nor, 
on  the  other  hand,  shall  we  explain  it  away,  take  all  its  own 
proper  pungency  out  of  it,  and  reduce  it  to  a soul-destroying 
opiate.  With  such  care,  and  in  such  a spirit,  let  us  proceed 
with  the  inquiry,  Are  all  mankind  by  nature  totally  depraved  ? 

1.  It  is  not  true  that  all  mankind  are  depraved  in  the  high- 
est degree  that  is  possible.  In  other  words,  it  is  not  true  that 
all  are  as  bad  as  they  can  be.  This  is  not  true,  indeed,  of  any 
one  of  the  race.  On  the  contrary,  the  Scriptures  themselves 
affirm  of  some  very  bad  men,  that  they  are  still  growing  worse. 
“But  evil  men  and  seducers  shall  wax  worse  and  worse,  deceiv- 
ing and  being  deceived.” — 2 Tim.  iii : 13.  This  would  clearly 
be  impossible  if  they  were  already  as  bad  as  they  are  capable 
of  becoming. 

2.  It  is  not  true  that  all  mankind  are  equally  bad.  Many 
passages  of  Scripture  indicate  various  degrees  of  sinfulness  or 
ill-desert  in  different  persons  and  classes  of  persons.  Particu- 
larly the  scriptural  representations  of  God’s  judgment  show 
that  it  will  be  a discriminating  judgment ; that  in  the  day  of 
judgment  it  will  be  “ more  tolerable  ” for  some  than  for  others. 
— Matt.  : xi  : 20,  24,  x : 1 5.  xii  : 41,  42. 

3.  It  is  not  true  that  every  movement  of  unregenerate 
human  nature  is,  per  se,  sinful.  We  have  the  record  of_  our 
Saviour  being  much  pleased  with  a man  of  whom,  neverthe- 


472 


Total  Depravity. 


[July, 


less,  He  said  that  he  “ lacked  one  thing”;  and  the  sequel  con- 
strains us  to  think  that  it  was  a fatal  defect  in  his  character. 
Mark  : x : 21. 

Says  Dr.  McCosh:  “ Does  any  man  stand  up  and  say,  I was 
in  a virtuous  state  at  such  and  such  a time,  when  I was  defend- 
ing the  helpless  and  relieving  the  distressed  ? We  admit  at 
once  that  these  actions  are  becoming.  . . If  we  could 

judge  these  actions  apart  from  the  agent,  we  should  unhesi- 
tatingly approve  of  them.”" 

Some  one  may  say  that  if  we  cannot  judge  the  actions  apart 
from  the  agent,  we  have  no  right  to  judge  the  agent  except  by 
his  actions,  and  that  even  God  will  judge  every  man  “ accord- 
ing to  his  deeds.”  This  is  true,  for  it  is  Scripture.  But,  doubt- 
less, it  is  the  whole  of  a man’s  deeds  by  which  God  will  judge 
him,  and  we  ourselves  may  find  reason  to  question,  in  many 
particular  cases,  whether  a man’s  doing  a particular  virtuous 
deed  proves  him  to  be,  even  at  that  time,  in  a soundly  virtuous 
state. 

4.  It  is  true  of  every  unrenewed  man  that  the  ruling  prin- 
ciple of  his  life  is  wrong.  In  the  last  analysis  this  ruling 
principle  has  ascendency  over  the  whole  man,  over  all  the  pow- 
ers and  susceptibilities  of  his  being,  and  penetrates  with  its 
pernicious  influence  his  entire  character.  The  tendency  of  one 
in  such  a condition  obviously  is  to  grow  worse.  The  natural 
proclivity  is  to  evil.  We  are  held  back  from  this,  or  lifted  out 
of  it,  only  by  some  gracious  power  coming  upon  us  from  with- 
out ourselves;  coming  down  upon  us  from  above.  The  most 
amiable  of  young  men,  the  most  lovely  of  young  women,  the 
sweetest  babe  that  smiles  back  its  mother’s  smile,  if  left  forever 
to  the  purely  natural  development  of  what  is  in  it  by  nature, 
will  (we  have  scriptural  reason  to  believe)  become  as  bad  as 
Satan.  The  leprosy  may  yet  have  appeared  only  in  one  small, 
faint  spot ; nay,  to  human  eyes  it  may  yet  be  quite  invisible, 
but  being  in  the  system,  its  malign  power  is  equal  to  the  fearful 
work  of  corrupting  every  member  and  organ,  and  reducing  the 
whole  body  to  a mass  of  loathsomeness.  It  possesses  the 
whole  body,  and  in  due  time  will  assert  its  possession.  So  does 
sin  reign  over  the  whole  man.  So  does  it  possess  and  corrupt 


*Divine  Government,  p.  360. 


1877.] 


Total  Depravity. 


473 


man’s  entire  nature.  Gen.  vi : 5 ; Prov.  xxi : 4 ; Eccl.  viii : 2 ; 
Rom.  vii : 1 8,  viii : 7 ; 1 Cor.  ii  : 14. 

We  have  spoken  of  the  ruling  principle  of  the  unregenerate 
man’s  life  being  wrong,  and  vitiating  his  whole  character. 
It  is  not  unreasonable  to  ask  us  what  that  wrong  ruling  prin- 
ciple is.  It  may  not  be  possible  to  give  any  simple  and  brief 
answer  which  is  not  liable  to  convey  an  erroneous  impression. 
If  required  to  answer  in  one  word,  the  word  shall  be  selfishness. 
We  would  define  this  as  supreme  regard  for  self.  Yet  it  is  not 
a regard  for  one’s  own  true  welfare.  It  often  involves  reckless 
disregard  of  this,  or  mad  shutting  of  the  eyes  to  it,  and  rushing 
on  destruction,  giving  one’s  self  up  to  present  gratification, 
however  destructive  that  gratification  may  be  known  to  be.  It 
is  doubtful  whether  there  has  ever  lived  a more  unselfish  man, 
save  the  man  Christ  Jesus,  than  he  who  wrote  as  the  foremost 
of  his  seventy  famous  resolutions,  “ Resolved,  that  I will  do 
whatsoever  I think  to  be  most  to  God’s  glory,  and  my  own  good , 
profit  and  pleasure,  ON  THE  WHOLE  ; without  any  consideration 
of  the  time,  whether  now,  or  never  so  many  millions  of  ages 
hence ; to  do  whatever  I think  to  be  my  duty,  and  most  for  the 
good  and  advantage  of  mankind  in  general,  whatever  difficulties 
I meet  with,  how  many  and  how  great  soever.”*  No  selfish 
man  ever  had  such  a wise  regard  for  his  own  zvelfare,  ON  the 
WHOLE. 

Perhaps  we  should  be  viewing  our  subject  more  advan- 
tageously from  the  opposite  direction,  viz. : if  we  should  con- 
sider the  want  of  any  right  governing  principle  in  the  natural 
man.  Such  a system  of  powers  as  the  human  soul  is,  working 
on  evermore  without  a right  governing  principle,  is  as  fearful 
an  example  of  organized  disorder  as  can  be  imagined. 

We  may  not  all  agree  in  our  statements  of  what  should  be 
the  governing  principle  of  the  human  soul.  The  difficulty  of 
agreement,  however,  will  be  found  with  reference  to  the  ulti- 
mate ground  of  obligation,  and  not  in  respect  to  the  rule  for 
man’s  practical  guidance.  That  the  will  of  God  is  right  in 
every  case,  none  will  question,  whether  they  think  that  right 
is  constituted  by  his  will,  or  is  determined  by  his  nature,  or  is 
the  eternal  principle  to  which  his  will  and  his  nature  eternally 
conform,  and  therefore  deserve  the  supreme  regard  which  he 


*Life  of  Pres.  Edwards. 


474 


Total  Depravity. 


[July, 


claims.  In  either  view  of  that  question,  the  known  will  of 
God  is  man’s  rule,  and  God  himself  ought  to  be  the  supreme 
object  of  man’s  regard  and  affection. 

Dr.  McCosh,  and  his  great  instructor,  Chalmers,  have  impres- 
sively exhibited  the  lack  of  “ Godliness"  as  the  preeminent  fea- 
ture of  universal  human  depravity.  They  have  shown  how  rad- 
ically defective  that  virtue  must  be  which  concerns  itself  never  so 
scrupulously,  equitably,  or  tenderly  with  the  obligations  which 
exist  toward  one's  fellow-creatures,  but  is  indifferent,  or  negli- 
gent, or  obdurate  toward  God.  Are  they  not  right  in  this  ? 
Is  there  not  some  radical  defect  in  a morality  which  finds  all 
its  applications  earth-ward,  and  none  heaven-ward  ; all  man- 
ward  and  none  God-ward  ; which  renders  its  possessor  scrupu- 
lous in  his  dealings  with  men,  generous  and  kind  to  them,  but 
content  to  live  in  confessed  neglect  of  his  obligations  to  God? 

Dr.  McCosh  affirms  these  general  principles : (i.)  “That  in 
judging  of  a responsible  agent,  at  any  given  time,  we  ought  to 
take  into  view  the  whole  state  of  his  mind.  (2.)  That  the 
mental  state  of  the  agent  cannot  be  truly  good,  provided  he  is 
in  the  meantime  neglecting  a known  obligation. ”*  He  illus- 
trates these  principles  by  applying  them  to  several  supposed 
cases.  (1.)  “A  boy  arrived  at  the  age  of  responsibility,  running 
away  from  his  parents  without  provocation  of  any  kind.-’  All 
the  generous  and  chivalrous  behavior  of  such  a lad  among  his 
fellows  cannot  put  him  into  a sound  and  good  moral  con- 
dition while  he  persists  in  his  truancy.  “ All  his  kindness  will 
not  draw  a single  smile  of  complacency  from  the  rightly  con- 
stituted mind  till  he  return  to  his  father’s  house  and  to  his 
proper  allegiance.” 

(2.)  A person  who  has  unjustly  got  possession  of  a neighbor’s 
property,  and  is  then  “very  benevolent  in  the  use  which  he  makes 
of  his  wealth.”  We  may  instructively  extend  this  illustration  to 
men  who  grow  rich  in  public  offices,  in  which  they  handle  the 
public  revenues,  and  are  then  admired  by  the  unthinking  for 
the  liberality  of  their  expenditure,  and  their  gifts  to  the  poor. 
The  silly  sheep  bleat  their  admiration  and  gratitude  for  the 
corn  lavishly  fed  to  them,  not  careful  to  reckon  with  how  small 
a part  of  the  price  of  their  own  fleeces  it  has  been  purchased. 


Divine  Government,  pp.  357  —3 5 S 


a 8 77-\ 


Total  Depravity. 


475 


But  surely  no  thoughtful  and  intelligent  citizen  approves  “ the 
whole  state  of  mind”  of  a man  whose  liberality  is  shown  in  the 
use  of  money  which  he  dishonestly  stopped  on  its  way  to  the 
public  treasury. 

Dr.  McCosh  adduces  several  other  illustrations,  showing  very 
clearly  “ how  the  moral  faculty  cannot  approve  of  an  agent, 
even  when  doing  an  act  good  in  itself,  provided  he  is  in  a bad 
moral  state,  and  living,  meanwhile,  in  neglect  of  a clear  and 
bounden  duty.” 

Perhaps  those  principles  may  be  brought  home  more  impres- 
sively to  us  by  an  illustration  drawn  from  our  national  experi- 
ence. There  were  men,  a few  years  ago.  in  rebellion  against 
the  Government  of  our  country,  whose  private  lives  were 
unstained  by  vice,  and  were  adorned  with  social  and  domestic 
virtues  and  graces.  They  were  chivalrous  in  their  intercourse 
with  companions  in  arms,  merciful  to  prisoners  of  war,  chaste, 
temperate,  truthful.  Were  all  these  private  virtues  of  any  ac- 
count to  the  Government  so  long  as  they  were  in  arms  against 
it  ? In  dealing  with  them  as  rebels,  could  the  Government 
abate  anything  of  its  severity  on  account  of  any  good  deeds 
done  in  rebellion?  Doubtless  we  must  feel  a less  degree  of 
abhorrence  toward  such  men  than  toward  any  who  to  re- 
bellion superadded  cruelty  to  helpless  captives,  or  wanton  out- 
rages upon  loyal  households,  or  indulgence  in  low  and  degrad- 
ing vices.  Yet  toward  the  Government  against  which  they 
were  in  rebellion  their  character  as  citizens  was  utterly  lost. 
The  forfeiture  was  complete,  entire,  total. 

Now  let  us  recollect  that  in  this  earthly  relation  of  citizen- 
ship a man’s  entire  character  is  not  involved.  His  whole  duty 
is  not  included  in  loyalty  to  the  Government  of  his  country. 
But  loyalty  to  God  does  include  all  his  duty,  and  does  involve 
his  whole  character.*  Disloyalty  toward  the  Divine  govern- 
ment is  universal  moral  failure.  Wrong  there,  at  the  centre, 
a man  is  wrong  throughout.  He  may  not  actually  do  wrong 
in  every  case,  but  he  is  totally  destitute  of  any  principle 
which  would  insure  his  acting  right  in  any  case  where  the  in- 
ducement to  wrong  is  great  enough. 

These  observations  show  a just  sense  in  which  the  depravity 
of  mankind  is  indeed  a total  depravity.  They  fitly  illustrate 

*Eccl.  xii.  13  . 


476 


Total  Depravity. 


[Juiy; 


the  sense  in  which  that  affirmation  is  made  by  Calvinists.  We 
are  not  to  be  understood  as  affirming  that  all  mankind  are 
equally  wicked  ; nor  that  any  one  man  is  as  wicked  as  he  can 
be  ; nor  that  there  is  no  difference  in  moral  character  between 
men  and  devils.  All  such  statements  are  uncandid  caricatures 
of  Calvinism,  or  ignorant  exaggerations,  or  unfortunate  misap- 
prehensions of  it. 

Nevertheless,  we  ought  candidly  to  recognize  the  liability  to- 
occasion  such  misapprehensions  by  harsh  or  unguarded  state- 
ments. In  preaching  and  in  writing,  we  are  bound  to  consider 
what  impressions  our  words  are  likely  to  make  upon  our  actual 
hearers  or  readers,  in  their  actual  circumstances,  and  with  their 
actual  culture,  antecedents  and  prejudices.  It  is  not  enough 
to  consider  only  what  impressions  they  are  entitled  to  receive,, 
or  would  receive,  if  they  were  all  capable  of  estimating  our  words 
with  grammatical  and  logical  precision.  We  ought  to  do  all  in 
our  power,  with  the  most  patient  care  and  painstaking,  to  en- 
sure true  impressions,  even  to  ignorant,  or  weak,  or  prejudiced! 
hearers. 

This  may  depend  upon  the  state  of  our  hearts,  even  more 
than  on  the  accuracy  of  our  thinking,  or  the  rhetorical  faultless- 
ness of  our  statements.  Are  we  chiefly  desirous  of  confound- 
ing and  silencing  opponents,  or  of  winning  and  saving  souls — 
winning  them  unto  acceptance  of  the  truth,  that  they  may  be 
saved  by  its  power,  begotten  through  it  into  sonship  to  God  ? 

If  we  believe  in  total  depravity  as  a matter  of  our  own  expe- 
rience, the  awful  burden  of  which  we  share  with  our  hearers  ; if 
we  solemnly,  and  humbly,  and  thankfully  feel  that  from  such 
utter  ruin  and  helplessness  Christ  has  redeemed  us,  and  the 
patient  love  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  delivering  us,  this  view  and 
this  feeling  will  not  probably  be  misunderstood.  If  we  address 
our  hearers,  not  with  harsh  and  imperious  objurgation,  but  with- 
respectful,  sorrowful,  tender  sympathy — not  as  if  we  forgot 
that  the  human  nature  is  our  own  nature,  but  confessing  that 
we,  as  well  as  they,  need  deliverance  from  its  guilt  and  misery 
— if  we  speak  to  men  thus  humbled,  awed,  burdened,  they  will 
be  apt  to  get  our  true  meaning.  The  painful  but  necessary 
truth  will  be  apt  to  reach  them,  however  rhetorically  imperfect 
our  utterance  of  it  may  be.  They  will  be  apt  to  feel  them- 
selves as  depraved  as  we  honestly  confess  ourselves  to  be. 


1877-] 


Total  Depravity. 


477 


Neither  they  nor  we  will  dicker  and  chaffer  about  the  ad- 
jectives with  which  we  shall  define  our  depravity,  and  tfy  to 
express  our  sense  of  its  intensity. 

The  question  may  still  arise,  “ Shall  we  use  the  terms  total 
depravity  in  describing  the  actual  moral  condition  of  unregen- 
erate man  ?”  We  have  no  categorical  answer  to  this  question. 
The  obligation  to  do  our  best  to  make  the  truth  understood, 
to  give  truthful  impressions  to  the  minds  actually  addressed, 
may  forbid  giving  one  and  the  same  answer  to  that  question 
for  all  times  and  places.  The  use  of  that  phrase  would  not 
make  the  same  impression  on  all  classes  of  hearers ; it  would 
not  convey  the  same  idea  to  all  classes  of  minds.  We  cannot 
acquit  ourselves  of  the  responsibilities  which  rest  upon  us  in  the 
pastoral  care  of  souls  in  any  so  summary  and  easy  way  as 
would  be  implied  by  a categorical  answer  to  such  a question. 

There  have  been  ministers  who  accounted  the  frequent  af- 
firmation of  total  depravity , in  those  very  terms,  necessary  to 
fidelity  in  preaching.  They  could  not  see  any  variation  from 
this  usage  in  any  other  light  than  that  of  an  attempt  to  soothe 
and  flatter  those  who  need  to  be  humbled  and  alarmed.  The 
omission  of  those  terms  from  any  discourse  relating  to  the 
natural  man’s  spiritual  condition  would  make  them  suspicious 
of  its  orthodoxy.  Yet  those  terms  are  not  found  in  the  West- 
minster Confession  of  Faith,  nor  in  the  Shorter  Catechism,  nor 
in  the  Larger  Catechism,  nor  in  the  Bible.  Doubtless  we  do 
find  in  the  Bible,  and  in  those  admirable  summaries  of  its  doc- 
trines, all  which  is  intended  to  be  expressed  by  those  terms,  as 
orthodox  writers  and  preachers  have  used  them.  This  justi- 
fies the  use  of  them  wherever  they  are  likely  best  to  convey 
the  truth  they  are  intended  to  convey,  or  with  such  explana- 
tion as  will  guard  them  against  making  a false  impression,  in- 
jurious to  souls  that  need  faithful  and  careful  leading.  But  it 
does  not  justify  requiring  any  man  to  use  them  on  pain  of 
having  his  orthodoxy  impeached  or  suspected,  if  he  believes 
that  he  can  more  successfully  convey  that  truth  to  the  minds 
of  his  hearers  by  the  use  of  any  other  terms.  Every  one  of  us 
has  the  same  liberty,  which  our  brethren  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly  took,  of  judging  for  himself,  before  God,  by  what 
terms  he  can  most  surely  and  most  effectually  convey  the  truth 
into  the  minds  for  the  instruction  of  which  he  is  responsible. 


4/8 


[July, 


Total  Depravity. 

The  necessity  of  explaining  these  terms,  which  experience 
has  made  apparent — the  tendency  of  almost  all  explanations 
to  begin  by  declaring  that  the  terms  do  not  mean  what  experi- 
ence shows  that  many  persons  take  them  to  mean — goes  far  to 
justify  any  preacher  in  the  endeavor  to  find  other  terms  to  ex- 
press the  truth  which  these  terms  are  intended  to  express, 
without  the  erroneous  impression  which  they  have  been  found 
liable  to  make.  If  such  terms  can  be  found,  they  are  likely  to 
send  the  truth  home  the  more  convincingly  because  they  can 
be  uttered  by  the  preacher  without  any  misgiving,  and  without 
explanations  which  may  seem  to  explain  them  away. 

There  is  another  and  opposite  class  of  minds,  inclined  to  re- 
pudiate the  phrase  “ total  depravity,”  and  even  to  discard  it  with 
some  tokens  of  contempt.  To  such  persons  we  would  say,  Be- 
ware, lest  you  make  not  only  an  erroneous  but  a fatal  impres- 
sion on  many  persons  who  are  glad  to  hear  your  scornful 
rejection  of  a phrase  which  they  have  associated  with  orthodox 
teaching,  and  who  desire  to  escape  from  the  pressure  of  such 
teaching.  You  also  ought  carefully  to  study  the  laws  of  im- 
pression as  well  as  the  laws  of  language.  Beware,  lest  you 
dispel  from  your  hearers’  minds  the  conviction  of  that  solemn 
truth  which  those  terms  have  been  used  to  express.  Beware, 
lest  you  soothe  into  fatal  apathy  consciences  which  need  to  be 
roused.  Beware,  lest  you  let  yourselves  be  understood  to  cry, 
“ Peace,  peace,”  to  them  to  whom  God  has  said,  “ There  is  no 
peace.”  Nay,  beware  lest  you  yourselves  fail  to  see  and  to 
understand  the  awful,  the  fathomless  depth  of  guilt  and  misery 
from  which  you  yourselves,  as  well  as  those  to  whom  God 
sends  you,  must  needs  be  delivered. 

There  is  not  much  danger,  after  all,  of  men  feeling  their  own 
sinfulness  to  be  greater  than  it  really  is. 


I877-J 


The  M a lay  A rch  ipelago. 


479 


Art.  VI.— THE  MALAY  ARCHIPELAGO* 

By  Rev.  J.  K.  Wight,  New  Hamburg,  N.  Y. 

RENEWED  attention  will  doubtless  be  drawn  to  this  book 
because  of  the  more  recent  and  elaborate  work  by  the  same 
distinguished  author,  the  title  of  which  we  give  in  full  below,  f 
and  which  is  an  attempt  to  collect  and  summarize  the  existing 
information  on  the  distribution  of  land  animals,  and  to  explain 
the  more  remarkable  and  interesting  of  the  facts,  by  means  of 
established  laws  of  physical  and  organic  change  ; in  other 
words,  to  show  the  important  bearing  of  researches  into  the 
natural  history  of  every  part  of  the  world  upon  the  study  of  its 
past  history.  The  main  idea,  which  is  here  worked  out  in  such 
fulness  of  detail  for  the  whole  earth,  was  embodied  some  years 
since  in  a paper  on  the  “ Zoological  Geography  of  the  Malay 
Archipelago,”  which  appeared  in  the  Journal  of  Proceedings  of 
the  Linncan  Society  for  i860;  and  again  in  a paper  read  before 
the  Royal  Geographical  Society  in  1863.  (Preface.) 

We  shall  have  occasion  to  refer  again  to  this  more  recent 
work,  which  in  its  department,  and  for  those  specially  interest- 
ed in  geology  or  natural  history,  must  prove  an  exceedingly 
valuable  addition  to  our  stores  of  knowledge.  Yet,  as  better 
suited  to  the  general  reader,  and  because  of  the  special  interest 
attaching  to  a portion  of  the  globe  so  little  known,  and  because 
of  some  questions  not  touched  upon  in  the  larger  and  more 
elaborate  work,  we  turn  to  this  former  publication  of  Mr.  Wal- 
lace, which,  though  given  to  the  world  some  years  ago,  remains 
the  best  authority  upon  the  natural  history  of  those  islands, 
giving  at  the  same  time  many  pleasant  pictures  of  life  and 
travel  in  scenes  so  unlike  our  temperate  zone  and  our  civilized 
habits. 

Mr.  Wallace  dedicates  his  book  on  the  Malay  Archipelago 

* The  Malay  Archipelago  : The  Land  of  the  Orang-utan  and  the  Bird  of  Para- 
dise. A Narrative  of  Travel,  with  Studies  of  Man  and  Nature.  By  Alfred  Russell 
Wallace.  Illustrated,  pp.  638.  New  York:  Harper  & Brothers,  1869. 

f The  Geographical  Distribution  of  Animals.  With  a study  of  the  Relations  of 
Living  and  Extinct  Fauna,  as  Elucidating  the  Past  Changes  of  the  Earth’s  Surface. 
By  Alfred  Russell  Wallace,  author  of  the  “ Malay  Archipelago,”  etc.  In  two  Vol- 
umes. With  Maps  and  Illustrations,  pp.  503,607.  New  York:  Harper  & Broth- 
ers, 1876. 


480 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


July, 


to  Mr.  Darwin,  and  in  his  more  recent  work  he  says  that  they 
were  undertaken  through  his  and  Prof.  Newton’s  encourage- 
ment, so  that  though  he  does  not  often  place  himself  in  direct 
antagonism  to  Scripture  statement,  he  yet  pursues  a line  of  in- 
vestigation which  he  doubtless  thinks  is  opposed  to  traditional 
forms  of  belief.  We  welcome,  however,  thorough  investigation 
in  all  lines  of  study,  believing,  as  Dr.  Wm.  M.  Taylor  has  well 
said,  that  the  workers  in  Revelation  and  Science,  as  on  each 
side  of  the  Mount  Cenis  Tunnel,  will  not  meet  in  opposition 
but  to  remove  barriers  in  the  inquirer’s  way.  Light  will  shine 
through  what  now  appears  darkness. 

There  are  two  points  which  we  assume  will  be  of  special  in- 
terest to  the  readers  of  this  Review  in  connection  with  the 
Malay  Archipelago.  First,  the  bearing  of  researches  into  their 
natural  history  upon  revealed  truth  ; and,  secondly,  the  condi- 
tion of  man,  morally,  in  those  islands,  which  are  so  rich  in  ma- 
terial resources. 

Doubtless  few  whose  attention  has  not  been  especially  di- 
rected to  this  region,  realize  the  extent  of  these  islands.  The 
Archipelgao  is  4,000  miles  in  length  from  east  to  west,  and 
13,000  in  breadth  from  north  to  south.  In  Borneo  the  whole  of 
the  British  Isles  might  be  set  down  and  have  a margin  for  one 
or  two  islands  of  the  size  of  Ireland.  New  Guinea  is  still  larger, 
being  1,400  miles  long,  and  in  the  widest  part  400  broad,  or,  if 
we  except  Australia,  the  largest  island  in  the  w orld.  The 
whole  amount  of  land  in  this  Archipelago  is  supposed  to  be 
about  the  same  as  in  Western  Europe,  or  Germany,  Holland, 
France,  Italy,  Switzerland,  Spain  and  Portugal.  The  variety 
in  size  and  formation  is  almost  endless,  from  the  small  coral 
lagoon  to  the  high  volcanic  summit,  with  its  extinct  fires,  or  as, 
in  many  cases,  smoking  and  heaving  at  intervals  still.  Situated 
within  the  tropics,  the  vegetation  on  most  of  these  islands  is 
luxuriant — extending  from  the  water’s  edge  high  up  the  craggy 
sides  of  its  mountains,  and  including  most  of  the  famed  woods 
and  fruits  of  tropical  climes — sandal-wood,  bamboo,  rattan, 
palms  of  all  descriptions,  fruits  and  spices.  Borneo  is  the  home 
of  the  orang-utan,  which  is  only  equaled  by  the  gorilla,  and, 
next  to  that  monster  of  the  West-African  forests,  is  the  largest 
of  the  monkey  tribe.  Du  Chaillu  found  gorillas  five  feet  nine 
inches  in  height,  while  the  largest  orang  is  only  four  feet  two 
inches  high.  Monkeys  of  all  kinds,  and  nearly  all  of  the  larger 


1 87;.] 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


481 


animals,  disappear  as  you  go  east.  But  New  Guinea  and  the 
adjacent  islands  can  lay  claim  to  being  the  home  of  that  most 
beautiful  of  all  birds — the  bird  of  Paradise. 

The  products  of  these  islands  are  so  valuable  and  peculiar 
that  there  is  no  little  reason  for  supposing  that  Solomon’s  ships 
touched  at  some  of  them  in  their  three  years’  voyage  to  Ophir. 
Gold  and  diamonds  are  to  be  had  in  Borneo.  Apes  and  ele- 
phants’ teeth  are  there,  or  on  the  Malay  Peninsula,  while  the  pea- 
cocks we  fancy  were  this  more  rare,  and  most  beautiful  bird  of 
the  world.* 

Without  following  Mr.  Wallace  in  detail  as  he  traveled  from 
island  to  island,  now  living  in  European  towns,  now  in  native 
huts,  now  traveling  in  a steamer,  and  then  in  a native  prau,  we 
wish  to  state  some  of  the  results  of  his  researches  ; and — 

* The  word  translated  peacocks  in  1 Kings  x:  22  and  2 Chron.  ix:  21  is, 

— toucayim,  which  Gesenius  fancies  to  have  been  the  domestic  name  of  the  pea- 
cock in  India,  of  which  country  it  is  a native.  A bird  very  similar  to  the  peacock 
of  India  is  found  in  Java,  and  it  is  easily  domesticated  in  almost  any  country. 
That  India  was  not  the  Ophir  or  Tarshish  of  Solomon’s  three  years’  voyages  seems 
likely,  not  merely  because  it  was  so  near,  but  also  because  it  was  in  all  probability 
reached  by  an  overland  trade,  of  which  we  have  an  indication  in  the  building  of 
Tadmor,  120  miles  N.E.  of  Damascus,  and  more  than  half  the  distance  to  the  Eu- 
phrates. While  the  peacock  can  be  easily  domesticated,  and  thus  introduced 
without  difficulty  into  neighboring  countries,  it  is  almost  impossible  to  tame  the 
Bird  of  Paradise  or  make  it  live  in  confinement,  and  thus  transport  it  to  other  coun- 
tries. Mr.  Wallace  tried  caging  several  varieties,  but  though  feeding  well,  and 
lively  for  a day  or  two,  they  all  died  by  the  third  or  fourth  day.  He  finally  found 
a pair  alive  at  Singapore,  and  purchased  them  for  ^100,  and  brought  them  to 
England,  where  they  lived  for  a year  or  two.  It  is  doubtful  whether  any  light  can 
be  thrown  upon  the  question  of  the  right  interpretation  of  toucayim  from  the  pres- 
ent names  of  these  birds.  Gesenius  says  the  Sanscrit  name  for  peacock  is  sikhi. 
Mr.  Wallace  says  one  variety  of  the  birds  of  Paradise  (for  there  are  eighteen  dif- 
ferent kinds)  is  called  by  the  natives  ‘‘  goby  goby,”  and  its  cry  is  wawk-wawk- 
wawk,  wok-wok-wok,  which  resounds  in  early  morning  through  the  woods.  The 
nearest  resemblance  that  we  know  in  sound  is  the  Toucan  of  South  America.  But 
neither  the  beauty  of  the  bird,  nor  the  direction  from  Ezion-geber,  would  point  to 
South  America  as  the  Ophir.  Besides  beauty  of  plumage,  another  idea  may  pos- 
sibly have  been  the  attraction  when  apes  were  brought  in  those  ships,  and  that  is 
the  power  of  imitation  which  belongs  to  the  parrot  tribe.  The  distance  across 
oceans  is  not  such  an  obstacle  as  we  might  suppose.  The  Asiatics  of  Solomon’s 
time,  and  a few  centuries  later,  when  Babylon  was  built,  and  when  Lautoz,  the 
Chinese  philosopher,  visited  Greece,  and  Brahminism  spread  to  Java,  where  its 
solid  brick  and  stone  ruins  are  now  seen  among  bamboo  huts,  and  Buddhism  sent 
its  missionaries  to  Ceylon,  Siam  and  Japan,  and  across  the  Himalayas  to  Thibet 
and  China,  were  a race  whose  intellectual  activity  and  enterprise  are  in  striking 
contrast  with  the  apathy  and  sluggishness  of  their  descendants. 


482 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


[July, 


1.  As  to  the  distribution  of  animal  life.  The  impression 
with  most  would  be  that  in  islands  located  as  these  are,  within 
the  tropics,  and  in  near  proximity,  and  with  a flora  very  similar, 
that  the  fauna  should  be  very  much  alike.  But  instead  of  that, 
the  variations  are  distinct  and  marked.  The  larger  animals,  as 
the  elephant,  the  rhinoceros,  wild  cattle,  and  also  monkeys,  are 
to  a great  extent  the  same  in  Sumatra,  Borneo  and  Java,  as  in 
the  Malay  Peninsula.  But  eastward  all  the  larger  animals  dis- 
appear. In  New  Guinea  none  are  to  be  found  ; and  instead  are 
pigs,  bats,  opossums  and  kangaroos.  The  birds  differ  as  widely 
as  the  animals.  Thus,  out  of  three  hundred  and  fifty  varieties 
of  land  birds  inhabiting  Java,  not  more  than  ten  have  passed 
eastward  into  Celebes.  Of  the  one  hundred  and  eight  land 
birds  of  New  Guinea  and  adjacent  islands,  twenty-nine  are  ex- 
clusively characteristic  of  it.  Thirty-five  belong  to  that  limited 
area  which  includes  the  Moluccas  and  North  Australia.  One- 
half  of  the  New  Guinea  genera  are  found  also  in  Australia  and 
about  one-third  in  India  and  the  Indo-Malay  Islands  (p.  578). 
It  is  in  New  Guinea  and  adjacent  islands  alone  that  the  differ- 
ent varieties  of  the  Paradise  bird  are  found. 

According  to  our  author,  the  different  races  of  men  vary  al- 
most as  much  as  the  lower  orders  of  the  animal  creation.  In 
the  west,  or  in  Sumatra,  Borneo,  Java,  Celebes,  etc.,  the  islanders 
belong  to  a race  allied  to  the  Malay.  In  the  coast  regions  of 
Borneo  and  Sumatra  are  what  may  be  called  the  true  Malay 
race,  who  are  Mohammedans  in  religion,  speak  the  Malay,  and 
use  the  Arabic  character  in  writing.  Besides  these  Mohamme- 
dans there  are  the  savage  Dyaks  of  Borneo,  who  are  not  Mo- 
hammedans. In  Java  a similar  race  exists,  though  their  lan- 
guage differs  from  the  Malay.  Their  religion  is,  however,  Mo- 
hammedan. The  Malays  are  smaller  than  Europeans,  their 
complexion  brown,  hair  straight  and  black,  and  no  beard. 

The  race  which  is  strongly  contrasted  to  this  is  the  Papuan 
or  New  Guinean.  Between  the  two  there  has,  however,  been 
more  or  less  of  mixture,  and  in  many  places  a commingling  of 
other  races,  especially  the  Chinese,  who  are  found  among  these 
islands  as  on  the  Malay  Peninsula,  wherever  there  is  any  open- 
ing for  trade.  The  Malays  are  so  nearly  allied  to  the  East  Asi- 
atic population,  that  in  Bali  the  Chinese  who  had  adopted  the 
native  costume  could  hardly  be  distinguished  from  the  Malay. 
The  typical  Papuan,  however,  is  unlike  the  Matey.  The  color 


1 877*1 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


483 


of  the  body  is  a deep  sooty-brown  or  black,  approaching  in 
color  the  true  negro.  The  hair  is  peculiar,  being  harsh,  dry~ 
and  frizzly,  and  standing  up  from  the  head  like  a mop.  The 
nose  is  large,  arched  and  high,  the  lips  thick  and  protuberant, 
and  the  face  covered  with  beard.  In  stature  they  nearly  equal 
the  average  European.  In  character  the  Papuan  is  bold,  im- 
petuous, excitable  and  noisy.  The  Malay  is  bashful,  cold,  un- 
demonstrative and  quiet.  From  this  description  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  Papuan  bears  a close  resemblance  to  the  negro  of  Af- 
rica, and  also  to  the  inhabitants  of  Polynesia. 

We  come  now  to  the  question,  How  is  this  peculiar  distribu- 
tion of  animal  life  to  be  accounted  for?  So  fair  as  man  is  con- 
cerned, he  has  the  means  of  passing  from  island  to  island.  But 
here  are  two  strongly  marked  races  in  close  proximity,  and 
what  is  the  cause  of  the  wide  divergence?  This  question  with 
respect  to  man  we  will  take  up  after  looking  at  the  lower  order 
of  animal  life. 

Two  facts  are  to  be  considered — one  of  similarity  to  the  pro- 
ductions of  the  main-land,  and  the  other  of  divergence.  How, 
first,  are  we  to  account  for  the  similarity,  or  how  did  the  pro- 
ducts of  the  animal  and  vegetable  kingdoms  cross  these  seas 
and  straits,  and  propagate  themselves  in  their  island  homes  ? 
Mr.  Wallace  adopts  the  theory,  first  suggested  by  Mr.  Earle  in 
a paper  read  before  the  Royal  Geographical  Society  in  1845, 
that  these  islands,  in  some  former  geologic  period,  were  con- 
nected with  two  great  continents — Asia  on  the  one  hand,  and 
Australia  on  the  other.  And  that  as  evidence  of  this  a shallow 
sea,  less  than  forty  fathoms  deep,  now  connects  them  with  these 
continents,  while  a sea  of  over  one  hundred  fathoms  in  depth 
to  the  eastward  of  Celebes  separates  them  from  one  another. 
That  there  have  been  great  geological  changes  in  this  region, 
and  not  necessarily  at  a very  remote  period,  is  evident  from 
the  existence  of  so  many  extinct  and  active  volcanoes,  some  of 
which  are  elevated  six  to  eight  thousand  feet.  A correspond- 
ing subsidence  in  the  same  general  region  would  be  expected 
after  any  great  elevation  of  land. 

It  might  be  thought  that  the  seeds  of  plants  could  be  borne 
by  winds  and  currents  to  neighboring  islands  ; and  that  birds 
and  animals  could  pass  from  one  to  the  other.  While  this  is 
true  of  the  vegetable  creation  to  some  extent,  and  is  also  true 


484 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


[July, 


of  some  birds,  yet  to  many  land  animals  and  many  varieties  of 
birds,  even  a narrow  channel  of  the  sea  forms  an  impassable 
barrier.  To  illustrate  what  would  be  the  case,  supposing  the 
causes  which  are  now  in  existence  only  to  operate,  let  us  take 
Celebes,  the  strange-shaped  island  near  the  center  of  the  Archi- 
pelago. From  its  position,  separated  only  by  a narrow  inter- 
vening strait  from  Borneo,  and  surounded  by  other  islands,  and 
with  large  indentations  of  the  sea,  and  having  comparatively 
only  a narrow  breadth  of  land,  it  is  admirably  fitted  to  receive 
the  forms  of  life  which  exist  in  at  least  the  neighboring  islands. 
But  Mr.  Wallace  says  it  is  the  poorest  of  them  all  in  the  number 
of  its  species,  and  the  most  isolated  in  the  character  of  its  pro- 
ductions (p.  277).  Of  the  land  birds  there  are  one  hundred  and 
twenty-eight  different  species.  Of  these  twenty  roam  over  the 
whole  Archipelago,  leaving  one  hundred  and  eight  species  more 
especially  characteristic  of  the  island.  Of  these  only  nine  ex- 
tend to  the  islands  westward,  and  nineteen  to  the  islands  east- 
ward, while  no  less  than  eighty  are  confined  to  Celebes.  Of 
these  there  are  many  which  have  no  affinity  with  birds  on  the 
nearer  islands,  but  bear  a close  resemblance  to  those  in  such 
distant  regions  as  New  Guinea,  Australia,  India  or  Africa. 

The  peculiar  isolation  of  the  fauna  of  this  island  Mr.  Wallace 
is  disposed  to  account  for  by  supposing  that  it  is  older  land,  or 
was  elevated  above  the  surrounding  ocean  before  the  other 
islands. 

Whether  this  theory  of  subsidence  of  sea  and  elevation  of 
land,  will  answer  all  the  necessities  of  the  case,  seems  doubtful. 
It  might,  if  the  types  of  animal  and  vegetable  life  were  in  all 
respects  similar  to  the  mainland  ; but  as  they  differ  so  radically 
in  many  particulars,  there  is  the  necessity  of  accounting  for  the 
isolated  and  peculiar  forms  of  life. 

In  glancing  at  the  questions  here  involved,  we  cannot  adopt 
the  statements  and  conclusions  of  our  author.  As,  for  instance, 
Mr.  Wallace  says  : “ Naturalists  have  now  arrived  at  the  con- 
clusion that  by  some  slow  process  of  development  or  transmu- 
tation, all  animals  have  been  produced  from  those  which  pre- 
ceded them  ; and  the  old  notion  that  every  species  was  specially 
created  as  they  now  exist,  at  a particular  time,  and  in  a par- 
ticular spot,  is  abandoned  as  opposed  to  many  striking  facts, 
and  unsupported  by  any  evidence.”* 


* Geographical  Distribution  of  Animals,  Vol.  I.,  p.  6 


i877-] 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


485 


This  modification  of  animal  life,  he  acknowledges,  has  taken 
place  very  slowly,  so  that  the  historic  period  of  three  or  four 
thousand  years  has  hardly  produced  a perceptible  change  in  a 
single  species.  Even  to  the  last  glacial  epoch,  50,000  or 
100,000  years,  modification  has  taken  place  only  in  a “ few  of 
the  higher  animals  into  very  slightly  different  species.”"  It 
will  be  seen  that  this  theory  takes  for  granted  what  even  Mr. 
Wallace  admits  has  never  taken  place  in  historic  times,  a single 
clear  instance  of  transmutation  of  species.  2.  If  there  has 
been  transmutation,  it  does  not  do  away  with  the  necessity  of 
creation.  Modification,  development,  evolution,  from  lower  to 
higher  forms,  which  all  recognize,  is  not  creation  or  calling 
things  that  are  out  of  those  that  are  not.*  3.  All  the  facts  ad- 
duced by  Mr.  Wallace  point  to  an  entirely  different  conclusion 
than  that  of  transmutation.  No  one  has  demonstrated  better 
than  he  that  the  habitat  of  very  many  animals  is  exceedingly 
limited.  There  are  a few  that  are  somewhat  cosmopolitan, 
but  every  continent,  and  almost  every  island,  especially  in  this 
Malay  Archipelago,  has  its  distinct  fauna.  Even  those  conti- 
nents which  are  connected,  as  Europe,  Asia  and  Africa,  have, 
in  different  parts,  their  own  special  forms  of  animal  life.  These 
differences  are  more  marked  when  wide  seas  intervene.  In 
Australia  there  are  no  elephants  or  tigers,  no  apes  or  monkeys, 
no  deer  or  oxen,  none  of  the  familiar  types  of  quadrupeds  ex- 
isting in  other  parts  of  the  globe,  but  kangaroos  and  opossums. 
So,  also,  its  birds  differ  from  those  of  other  regions. 

The  present  distribution  of  animal  life,  therefore,  would  in- 
dicate not  a transmutation  of  species  from  one  common  cen- 
tre or  origin,  but  a creation  of  many  species  in  their  particular 
locality.  The  distinction  between  man  and  the  other  animals 
in  this  respect  is  quite  plain  in  the  record.  According  to  the 
Bible,  all  mankind  were  descended  from  one  pair,  and  were 
spread  abroad  over  the  face  of  the  whole  earth.  But  with 
both  animals  and  vegetables,  the  method  was  different.  The 
waters,  not  in  one  place,  but  everywhere  and  in  all  directions, 
were  to  bring  forth  moving  creatures,  and  the  earth  living 
creatures.  For  the  locality,  for  the  food  provided,  for  all  the 
circumstances  in  which  the  creature  was  to  be  placed,  the  crea- 

* Geographical  Distribution  ot  Animals,  Vol.  I.,  p.  7 
(New  Series,  No.  22.) 


31 


486 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


[July, 


ture  made  was  adapted — opossums  and  kangaroos  in  Australia, 
elephants,  tigers,  and  the  domestic  animals  on  the  larger  con- 
tinents, and  beautiful  and  strange  birds  on  nearly  every  island 
of  the  sea. 

But  the  objection  will  readily  occur,  If  this  distribution  of 
animals  agrees  with  the  Mosaic  account  of  creation,  how  about 
the  deluge?  Were  all  the  animals  gathered  into  the  ark,  and 
if  so,  whence  the  wide  difference  of  species  from  those  at  pres- 
ent existing  in  Asia,  and  how  did  the  animals  cross  barriers  which 
they  are  never  known  to  cross  now?  Transmutation  of  species, 
if  we  believed  in  it,  would  be  a convenient  theory  to  help  us 
out  of  this  difficulty,  or  the  subsidence  and  elevation  of  conti- 
nents, or  the  survival  of  the  fittest.  We  must  concede  that  in 
the  present  state  of  our  knowledge  it  is  not  easy  to  reconcile 
the  geographical  distribution  of  animals  with  the  theory  of  a 
universal  deluge.  Theologians  must  look  at  all  the  difficulties 
of  the  case,  and  in  due  time  the  solution  will  come.  Hugh 
Miller  thought  he  had  found  a solution  in  a limited  deluge, 
brought  about  in  part  by  the  subsidence  of  the  earth  in  that 
locality  where  man  existed,  and  which  by  its  depression  would 
bring  in  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep.  Another  solution 
which  Prichard  advocates,  is  the  recreation  on  those  distant 
lands  and  islands  of  forms  of  life  that  had  previously  existed. 
But  it  might  be  asked,  (i)  why  not  recreate  all  the  forms  of 
life,  and  not  attempt  to  preserve  some  of  them  in  the  ark  ? 
And  (2),  the  account  of  creation  seems  to  imply  that  when  God 
finished  it,  he  rested  not  to  take  it  up  again.  With  man,  the 
last  and  highest  type,  the  work  was  complete,  and  its  com- 
pletion was  emphasized  by  the  Sabbath  or  period  of  rest. 
When  man  sinned,  God  did  not  destroy  them  all  and  recreate 
a new  human  race,  but  preserved  one  family.  And  so  with 
the  animals.  There  is  no  record  of  recreation.  Is  the  only 
conclusion,  then,  that  the  deluge  was  limited?  To  this  we 
must  say,  that  from  the  side  of  natural  history  there  are  facts 
on  both  sides  which  render  the  question,  for  the  present  at 
least,  not  easy  of  solution.  On  the  one  hand  there  are  all  the 
physical  difficulties  of  collecting  birds,  insects  and  animals  over 
seas  which  they  never  cross,  and  supplying  this  vast  concourse 
with  appropriate  food.  And  on  the  other,  we  find  this  equally 
remarkable  fact,  which  Mr.  Wallace  emphasizes,  “ of  the  recent 


1877-] 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


487 


and  almost  universal  change  that  has  taken  place  in  the  char- 
acter of  the  fauna  over  the  entire  globe.*  In  Europe,  in 
North  America,  and  in  South  America,  we  have  evidence  that 
a very  similar  change  occurred  about  the  same  time.”  The  re- 
mains of  mastodons,  huge  armadillos,  large  horses  and  tapirs, 
cave-lions,  etc.,  are  found  in  peat-bogs,  gravels  and  cave-earths, 
and  since  the  deposition  of  the  most  recent  of  the  fossil-bearing 
strata,  we  can  certify  to  the  correctness  of  this,  so  far  as  the 
mastodons  of  this  country  are  concerned.  Again,  in  Australia 
there  is  a similar  appearance  of  extinct  fauna,  some  of  gigantic 
size,  belonging  to  the  same  geologic  period — kangaroos  as 
large  as  an  elephant. f His  theory  of  accounting  for  this  simul- 
taneous change  over  large  portions  of  the  earth’s  surface,  is  the 
great  change  wrought  at  the  time  of  the  glacial  epoch,  some 
50,000  or  100,000  years  ago.  “We  live,”  he  says,  “ in  a zoolog- 
ically impoverished  world,  from  which  all  the  largest  and  fair- 
est and  strongest  forms  have  recently  disappeared,  and  it  is  no 
doubt  a much  better  world  for  us  now  they  have  gone.”;};  How, 
then,  are  remains  found  in  the  very  last  of  the  tertiary  deposits 
in  the  pliocene  and  post-pliocene  periods  ? Mr.  Wallace  would 
say,  We  are  to  weigh  the  evidence  whether  this  recent  dis- 
appearance of  strange  fauna  is  not  more  likely  to  have  been 
caused  by  the  deluge  than  by  the  glacial  epoch.  The  fact  that 
it  was  the  deluge  is  strengthened  in  our  minds  by  the  remains 
of  human  bones  found  in  the  same  cave-earths  with  those  of 
the  ancient  fossils  of  the  Old  World,  though  this  is  not  men- 
tioned by  our  author,  as  he  leaves  man  out  of  his  geographical 
distribution  of  animals.  We  would  not  be  too  positive  in  our 
assertions,  where  as  yet  the  data  have  not  been  perhaps  suffi- 
ciently examined,  but  the  acknowledged  change  requires  a re- 
cent cause,  and  this  recent  and  sufficient  cause  seems  to  be  met 
by  the  deluge.  Mr.  Wallace  is  justly  severe  on  “ those  who 
would  create  a continent  to  account  for  the  migrations  of  a 
beetle;”  so  we  question  the  propriety  of  dodging  an  adequate 
cause  of  three  or  four  thousand  years  ago,  for  a questionable 
solution  of  50,000  or  1 00,000  years  previous.  To  those  who 
look  for  a wise  and  kind  Providence,  even  in  the  midst  of 
judgment,  we  have  it  in  the  sweeping  away  of  so  many  fierce 

* Distribution  of  Animals,  vol.  i.,  p.  149.,  et  seq. 

| Ibid.,  p.  157.  % Vol.  I,  p.  150. 


488 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


[July, 


and  strange  animals,  which  made  the  world  after  the  flood  a 
better  habitation  for  man.  As  we  said,  however,  we  put  this 
fact  of  the  recent  disappearance  of  strange  and  huge  fauna, 
which  favors  the  belief  in  a universal  deluge,  over  against  the 
other  of  the  isolated  distribution  of  different  forms  of  animal 
life,  which  seems  to  make  it  impossible ; and  wait  for  further 
investigation  and  research  to  tunnel  through  this  difficulty. 

We  pass  now  to  the  question  about  the  two  races,  so  dissimi- 
lar, which  occupy  different  portions  of  this  Archipelago.  Our 
author  considers  them  so  entirely  different,  that  they  belong 
to  two  distinct  races,  rather  than  modifications  of  one  and  the 
same  race.*  To  this  we  may  assent  so  far  as  they  present  dis- 
tinct peculiarities,  and  show  an  origin  which  for  centuries  has 
been  separate,  but  not  if  he  means,  as  we  suppose  he  does,  that 
they  did  not  descend  from  one  common  pair.  If  man  was  only 
an  animal,  there  would  have  been  a chance  for  transmutation 
of  species ; but  as  he  is  man,  he  must  forsooth  have  come  from 
another  race.  However,  we  accept  the  fact  of  difference  in 
many  peculiarities.  The  Papuan  or  New  Guinean  resembles 
first  the  Polynesian  ; and  second,  has  certain  clearly  marked  af- 
finities which  connect  him  with  the  negro  of  Africa,  rather 
than  with  any  of  the  nations  of  Asia.  Supposing  the  ances- 
tors of  the  Papuan  to  have  come  from  Africa  rather  than  Asia, 
the  difficult  question  is,  how  did  they  get  across  the  Indian 
Ocean  to  Polynesia?  It  seems  a big  distance  to  pass  by  sea 
for  any  methods  of  navigation  now  known  to  these  races.  Possi- 
bly there  has  been  a decadence  in  knowledge,  as  exhibited  by 
the  native  races  on  our  own  continent  and  in  other  parts  of 
the  world,  when  the  descendants  of  former  generations  could 
not  rebuild  the  cities  and  temples  among  the  ruins  of  which 
they  dwell.  Europeans  and  Americans  are  always  thinking  of 
the  progress  of  the  race  ; Asiatics  of  its  decadence.  When  we 
find  the  savage,  we  hope  our  idea  is  true  of  his  future,  that  of 
the  Asiatic  may  be  correct  of  his  past  history,  rather  than  that 
he  has  always  stood  in  the  same  position.  Mr.  Wallace  him- 
self states  that  in  Java  there  are  ruins  of  elaborate  and  well 
constructed  temples,  where  solid  mason-work  has  in  a measure 
resisted  the  ravages  of  time  in  a tropical  climate,  which  are 


Malay  Archipelago , p.  532. 


1877-] 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


489 


surrounded  by  bamboo  huts — the  highest  style  of  architecture 
of  the  descendants  of  these  old  temple  builders.  It  may  be 
that,  as  nations,  which  in  Solomon’s  time  could  make  long  voy- 
ages, and  the  descendants  of  which  could  not  make  them  now, 
so  the  Africans  may  have  had  the  enterprise  then  to  leave 
their  native  shores  and  find  homes  in  Polynesia. 

Still  another  conjecture  is  open  without  being  obliged  to  re- 
sort to  any  such  theory  as  that  Polynesia  and  Africa  have  been 
peopled  by  more  than  one  race.  There  are  some  animals  allied 
to  apes,  which  go  on  all  fours,  called  lemurs,  which  are  com- 
mon to  some  of  these  islands,  and  also  to  Madagascar.  The 
baribossa  of  Celebes  and  Bouru  resembles  the  wart-hog  of 
Africa,  and  there  are  other  striking  resemblances  in  birds.  Dr. 
Sclater  has  suggested  that  a continent  even  existed  in  the 
Indian  Ocean  which  formed  a link  between  Africa  and  Poly- 
nesia, and  has  given  to  this  hypothetical  land  the  name  of 
Lemuria,  from  the  animal  which  first  suggested  the  connection 
of  those  now  widely  separated  regions  (p.  290). 

This  subsidence  of  continents  is  a convenient  escape  from 
many  difficulties.  And  of  the  fact  in  the  general  there  is  no 
doubt,  just  as  there  are  rocks  all  about  us  which  have  been 
elevated  from  their  ocean  beds  ; but  yet  subsidence  may  be 
assumed  in  directions  where  it  never  existed,  and  may  be  placed 
at  periods  which  cannot  be  definitely  determined  by  any  indi- 
cations which  we  now  have.  Mr.  Wallace,  rightly  we  think, 
hopes  for  light  in  the  study  of  extinct  fauna  and  flora  in  con- 
nection with  living  types  ; but  there  is  need  of  great  caution 
in  the  way  of  inferences.  In  his  later  work  he  seems  to  think 
the  line  of  connection  between  continents  has  been  north  and 
south,  rather  than  east  and  west,  and  so  is  inclined  to  give  up 
the  hypothetical  continent  of  Lemuria. 

Leaving  these  questions  of  physical  and  scientific  interest, 
let  us  look  briefly  at  the  present  condition  of  these  Islanders, 
and  see  what  has  been  done  toward  their  moral  and  spiritual 
elevation. 

The  Papuans  are  heathen,  and  have  been  left  more  undis- 
turbed in  their  heathenism  than  any  other  large  island  on  the 
face  of  the  globe.  Until  recently,  though  long  the  resort  of 
traders,  and  constantly  passed  by  vessels  going  to  Australia,  and 
frequently  by  those  going  to  China,  yet  the  only  attempts  at 


490 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


[July, 


evangelization,  so  far  as  we  know,  are  those  to  which  we  will 
presently  refer.  The  inhabitants  of  this  island  have  had  a 
character  for  violence  to  which  they  do  not  seem  entitled. 
They  are  fierce  looking,  and  cut  up  into  hostile  tribes;  but  Mr. 
Wallace  lived  among  them  without  difficulty.  They  are  noisy, 
boisterous,  but  no  worse  than  other  savages,  and  assimilating 
in  many  respects  to  the  natives  of  Madagascar  ; there  may  be 
as  great  triumphs  of  the  Gospel  in  store  for  them  as  have 
been  shown  on  that  island.  Under  a tropical  sun  they  have 
but  few  wants,  and  those  easily  supplied.  They  have  but  little 
occasion  to  resort  even  to  agriculture.  A sago  palm  cut  down, 
and  the  whole  inside  of  the  tree  washed  and  dried  and  made 
into  cakes,  will  produce  something  like  600  pounds  of  sago,  or 
enough  to  last  a year,  and  requiring  only  about  ten  days’  labor 
of  one  man,  or  more  usualty  woman,  to  get  it  ready  (p.  385). 
The  easier  the  means  of  subsistence  and  the  plenty  which 
might  be  had,  results,  in  the  savage  state,  in  the  greatest 
poverty  and  scarcity.  Where  the  sago  tree  abounds  the  Pa- 
puans live  almost  entirely  on  that,  and  a little  fish,  raising 
scarcely  any  vegetables  or  fruit.  In  one  of  his  excursions  Mr. 
Wallace  lived  for  a time  on  the  Aru  Islands,  a little  south  of 
New  Guinea,  and  acknowledges  that  the  monotony  and  uni- 
formity of  every-day  savage  life  revealed  a more  miserable  kind 
of  existence  than  when  it  had  the  charm  of  novelty.  Their 
food,  when  they  had  no  fish,  was  mostly  vegetable,  imperfectly 
cooked,  and  these  in  varying  and  often  insufficient  quantities. 
To  this  did  he  attribute  the  prevalence  of  skin  diseases,  and 
ulcers  on  the  legs  and  joints. 

“ The  chief  luxury  of  these  Aru  people  is  arrack  (Java  rum),  which  the 
traders  bring  in  great  quantities  and  sell  cheap.  A day’s  fishing  or  rattan 
cutting  will  purchase  at  least  a half  gallon  bottle , and  when  the  trepang  or 
birds’  nests  collected  during  a season  are  sold,  they  get  whole  boxes  contain- 
ing fifteen  such  bottles,  which  the  inmates  of  a house  will  sit  round  day  and 
night  till  they  have  finished.  They  themselves  tell  me  that  at  such  bouts 
they  often  tear  to  pieces  the  houses  they  are  in,  break  and  destroy  every- 
thing they  can  lay  their  hands  on,  and  make  such  a riot  as  is  alarming  to  be- 
hold ” (p.  453). 

He  says  they  seem  to  enjoy  pure  idleness,  often  sitting  for 
days  in  their  houses,  their  women  bringing  the  vegetables  or 
sago  which  form  their  food. 

On  these  islands  there  were  three  or  four  villages  on  the 


1 877-] 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


49 1 

coast  where  schoolmasters  from  Amboyna  reside,  and  the  people 
were  nominally  Christian,  and  to  some  extent  educated  and 
civilized.  Their  intercourse  with  Mohammedan  traders  had 
also  some  effect,  as  they  would  often  bury  their  dead,  though 
their  national  custom  was  to  expose  the  body  on  a raised  stage 
until  it  decomposed. 

On  New  Guinea  itself  there  was  no  Dutch  colony  at  the 
time  of  Mr.  Wallace’s  visit,  though  explorations  were  going  on 
for  the  purpose  of  planting  one.  Trading  vessels  pass  along 
the  coast,  and  at  the  fine  harbor  of  Dorey,  which  was  the  only 
point  where  Mr.  Wallace  made  any  tarry,  he  found  two  Ger- 
man missionaries.  At  that  time  they  were  the  only  ones  on 
the  island ; one  of  them  had  been  there  for  two  years  and  had 
learned  something  of  the  language,  and  was  attempting  to 
translate  portions  of  the  Bible,  and  had  also  started  a small 
school.  These  missionaries  were  accustomed  to  labor  and 
trade,  and  were  obliged  to  eke  out  the  small  salary  granted 
from  Europe  by  trading  with  the  natives — buying  their  rice 
when  it  was  cheap,  and  selling  it  back  when  they  were  in  need, 
at  an  advanced  price.  The  effect  of  this  on  the  natives  was 
the  impression  that  the  missionaries,  like  other  traders,  came 
among  them  for  their  own  personal  advantage,  and  not  for  the 
good  of  those  among  whom  they  labored. 

From  a recent  work*  we  learn  that  these  two  German  mis- 
sionaries are  dead,  and  that  their  places  have  not  been  sup- 
plied. “The  London  Missionary  Society”  directed  Mr. 
Murray  to  commence  a mission  on  New  Guinea.  This  he  did 
in  1871,  on  the  southeastern  extremity  of  the  island,  opposite 
to  Australia,  landing  some  native  missionaries  from  the  Loy- 
alty Islands  at  two  different  points.  One  party  of  these  was 
murdered  by  the  natives  ; what  was  the  reason  for  the  act  Mr. 
Murray  could  not  discover.  He  testifies,  however,  that  he 
found  no  difficulty  in  going  among  them  unarmed  at  all  points 
where  he  landed.  At  the  other  point  the  mission  was  suc- 
cessfully established,  and  to  the  native  missionaries  was  added 
a missionary  from  England. 

The  islands  to  the  westward,  where  the  Malay  race  predomi- 


*Forty  Years’  Missionary  Work  in  Polynesia  and  New  Guinea,  1835  to  1875, 
published  by  the  Carters. 


492 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


[July, 


nates,  have  been  brought  more  under  the  influence  of  civiliza- 
tion than  those  to  the  east.  Amboyna,  Java,  and  some  other 
points  have  been  visited,  and  occupied  for  the  purposes  of 
trade  for  three  hundred  years.  On  the  large  island  of  Aram, 
near  Amboyna,  there  are  schools  and  native  school-masters, 
and  many  of  the  inhabitants  are  nominal  Christians.  In  the 
larger  villages  are  European  missionaries.  Mr.  Wallace’s  esti- 
mate of  the  so-called  Christians  on  this  island  was  not  very 
favorable.  He  says  they  were  spoken  of  as  thieves,  liars, 
drunkards  and  incorrigibly  lazy  (p.  357).  One  cause  of  this, 
he  thinks,  is  that  with  Mohammedanism,  temperance  is  a part 
of  their  religion,  and  has  become  such  a habit  that  practically 
the  rule  is  never  transgressed.  One  fertile  source  of  want  and 
crime  is  thus  present  to  one  class  which  is  not  to  another.* 
Doubtless,  in  coming  out  of  one  system,  which  is  made  up  of 
ceremonies  and  particular  observances  and  with  greater  free- 
dom from  restraint,  and  yet  imperfectly  comprehending  the 
doctrines  of  Christianity,  and  imperfectly  brought  under  its 
morality,  there  is  some  cause  for  this  statement.  Christianity, 
with  a race  naturally  indolent  and  in  a low  state  of  civiliza- 
tion, has  a struggle  which  it  is  not  to  be  expected  will  trans- 
form at  once  such  a people  into  the  high  standard  toward 
which  civilized  nations  have  been  struggling  for  hundreds  of 
years. 

Partly  as  an  offset  to  the  above  unfavorable  view,  and  also 
as  giving  more  fully  the  Dutch  method  of  colonization  and 
Christianization,  we  will  abridge  his  favorable  report  of  the 
change  wrought  within  fifty  years  on  the  northeast  extremity 
of  Celebes.  Before  1822  this  was  a savage  community,  cut  up 
into  small,  isolated  tribes  and  villages,  with  houses  built  on 
lofty  posts  to  defend  themselves  from  their  enemies.  Strips  of 
bark  were  their  only  dress  ; and  human  skulls  were  the  chief 
ornaments  of  the  houses  of  their  chiefs.  The  country  was  a 
pathless  wilderness,  with  small,  cultivated  patches  of  rice  and 
vegetables.  In  the  year  1822  the  coffee  plant  was  introduced 

‘Notwithstanding  what  he  says  here  about  the  temperance  principles  of  Mo- 
hammedanism, we  find  that  on  another  island  he  was  asked  by  Mohammedans 
for  spirits,  “the  people,”  he  says,  “being  merely  nominal  Mohammedans,  who 
confine  their  religion  almost  entirely  to  a disgust  at  pork  and  a few  other  forbidden 
articles  of  food.” 


1877-] 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


493 


into  this  region,  and  it  was  found  to  be  admirably  adapted  to 
its  cultivation.  The  country  rises  quite  rapidly  from  the  sea 
into  a high,  volcanic  region  with  a rich  soil.  Arrangements 
were  made  with  the  village  chiefs,  who  were  to  receive  a certain 
per  cent,  of  the  produce.  The  country  was  divided  into  dis- 
tricts, and  a “ controlleur”  appointed,  who  was  the  general 
superintendent  of  the  cultivation  of  the  district.  He  was 
obliged  to  visit  every  village  in  succession  once  a month,  and 
send  in  a report  of  their  condition  to  the  resident.  Under  the 
direction  of  the  Dutch,  roads  were  made,  houses  built,  mission- 
aries were  settled  in  the  more  populous  districts,  and  schools 
were  opened.  Mr.  Wallace  describes  one  of  the  villages  in 
this  region  through  which  he  passed.  The  main  road,  he  says, 
along  which  the  coffee  is  brought  from  the  interior  in  carts 
drawn  by  buffaloes,  is  turned  aside  at  the  entrance  of  the 
village  and  passes  behind  it,  and  so  allows  the  village  street 
to  be  kept  neat  and  clean.  In  this  village  the  street  was 
bordered  by  a neat  hedge  formed  of  rose  trees,  which  were 
perpetually  in  bloom.  There  was  a broad  central  path  kept 
clean,  and  a border  of  fine  turf,  which  was  neatly  cut.  The 
houses  were  all  of  wood,  raised  on  posts  about  six  feet  from 
the  ground,  with  a broad  veranda  and  balustrade,  and  the  walls 
neatly  whitewashed  and  surrounded  by  orange  trees  and  flow- 
ering shrubs.  He  stopped  with  a native  chief,  now  a major 
under  the  Dutch.  His  house  was  large,  airy,  substantially 
built,  and  furnished  in  European  style,  with  chairs,  tables  and 
lamps.  Meals  were  served  on  good  china,  while  his  host  sat 
at  the  head  of  the  table,  dressed  in  black,  with  patent  leather 
shoes.  This  man’s  father  was  one  of  those  whose  dress  was 
a strip  of  bark,  and  whose  house  was  ornamented  with  human 
heads.  In  this  village  there  was  a school-house,  its  teacher  a 
native,  who  had  been  educated  by  the  missionary  at  one  of 
the  larger  places.  School  was  held  every  morning  for  about 
three  hours,  and  twice  a week  there  was  catechising  and 
preaching.  There  was  also  a service  Sunday  morning.  The 
language  used  was  the  Malay. 

Near  the  villages  were  the  coffee  plantations.  The  trees  are 
planted  in  rows,  and  kept  topped  to  about  seven  feet  high. 
Each  tree  produced  from  io  to  20  pounds  of  cleaned  coffee  an 
nually.  The  plantations  are  formed  by  Government,  and  cul- 


494 


The  Malay  Archipelago. 


[July, 


tivated  by  the  villagers  under  the  direction  of  the  chief.  Cer- 
tain days  are  appointed  for  rveeding  and  gathering,  and  the 
whole  working  population  are  summoned  by  the  sound  of  a 
gong.  An  account  is  kept  of  the  day’s  work  of  each  family, 
and  the  produce  is  divided  accordingly.  The  price  is  fixed  by 
Government.  This  system  has  been  called  a “ paternal  despot- 
ism,” and  has  features  which  seem  strict,  and  wanting  in  that 
freedom  which  we  imagine  is  essential.  But  for  a people  just 
emerging  from  a savage  state,  it  has  its  advantages.  The  peo- 
ple were  well  cared  for,  better  fed,  housed,  educated,  and 
apparently  making  more  progress  than  in  any  other  place  in 
the  Archipelago.  There  seems  to  have  been  a combination  of 
causes — the  natives  falling  in  with  the  system,  and  the  officers 
of  Government  and  the  missionaries  doing  their  work  well — 
which  made  this  place  one  of  the  most  favorable  examples  of 
the  Dutch  system.  It  is  worth  studying  in  seeking  to  provide 
a system  which  shall  reach  the  wants  and  elevate  the  condition 
of  savage  races. 

These  islands — even  those  forming  the  west  portion  of  the 
Archipelago — though  largely  occupied  by  the  Dutch,  are  not 
all  held  by  them.  Part  of  Borneo  was  for  a time  governed  by 
an  Englishman,  Sir  James  Brooke.  Other  portions  are  held 
by  native  chiefs.  There  are  also  Dutch  settlements  on  the 
island.  Sumatra,  until  within  a few  years,  was  governed  al- 
most entirely  by  native  chiefs.  Some  European  government 
would  be  favorable  to  missionary  work,  but  it  undoubtedly 
might  be  pushed  into  regions  not  yet  occupied  by  the  Dutch 
Government,  or  by  German  missionaries.  Without  attempt- 
ing at  all  to  interfere  with  their  work,  some  contact  with  other 
methods  of  evangelization  would,  we  are  assured,  lead  to 
healthier  results. 

Because  two  men  were  killed  on  Sumatra  years  ago,  and  be- 
cause the  mission  among  the  Dyaks  of  Borneo  was  attended 
with  difficulty  and  little  success,  or  even  because  China  offers 
a larger  field  for  missionary  labor,  we  see  no  reason  why  islands, 
some  of  which  are  the  largest  in  the  world,  and  which  are 
capable  of  sustaining  a dense  population,  and  which  produce 
almost  spontaneously  every  variety  of  tropical  fruit  and  vege- 
tation, should  be  left  without  any  effort  to  evangelize  them 
except  by  the  missionaries  from  Holland,  or  the  few  who  may 


3877-] 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


495 


go  from  Germany.  The  Chinese  are  there  with  opium,  and 
the  Dutch,  Portuguese,  English  and  Malay  with  rum,  seeking 
spices,  beautiful  birds,  gold  dust,  diamonds.  Why  not  hasten 
with  the  glad  tidings,  and  elevate  regions  where  savages  roam, 
and  where  the  wilderness  is  tangled,  and  seek  to  make  it  the 
garden  of  the  Lord  ? 


Art.  VII.— A JEWISH  PRAYER  BOOK. 

By  Rev.  D.  W.  Fisher,  D.D.,  Wheeling,  West  Virginia. 
td n r6y  — Book  of  Prayers  for  Israelitish  Congregations.* 

The  Hebrew  words  ( Olath  Tamid)  which  constitute  the  title 
of  this  volume,  are  those  with  which  the  sixth  verse  of  the 
twenty-eighth  chapter  of  Numbers  begins.  They  are  trans- 
lated, both  by  the  compiler  and  in  our  English  Bible,  a contin- 
ual  burnt-offering.  As  they  stand  in  the  Scriptures,  they  re- 
late to  the  daily  sacrifice  which  was  required  by  the  Mosaic 
ritual.  The  lamb  which  was  offered  every  morning  and  even- 
ing, together  with  a tenth  part  of  an  ephah  of  flour,  and  a 
fourth  part  of  a hira  of  beaten  oil,  was  to  be  “ a continual 
burnt-offering,  which  was  ordained  in  Mount  Sinai  for  a sweet 
savour,  a sacrifice  made  by  fire  unto  the  Lord.”  This  whole 
verse  is  placed  in  both  Hebrew  and  English  on  the  title-page 
of  this  volume.  The  appropriation  of  these  words,  and  es- 
pecially the  care  which  is  taken  to  let  it  be  known  that  they 
are  a part  of  this  verse  in  the  Pentateuch,  are  significant  of 
the  wide  departure  of  the  phase  of  modern  Judaism,  repre- 
sented in  this  book,  from  that  type  which  formerly  prevailed 
almost  universally  among  the  Israelitish  people.  They  are 
here  applied,  not  to  the  daily  sacrifices  of  the  tabernacle  and 
the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  but  to  a ritual  in  which  such  offerings 
are  assumed  to  be  things  which  are  gone  forever,  and  which 
there  should  be  no  desire  to  restore. 

This  is  a book  which  is  well  worth  the  study  of  Christians. 
It  is  true  that  there  are  some  purposes  for  which  it  would  be 
vain  to  search  it.  It  does  not,  like  the  Targums,  throw  any 


* Prepared  by  Dr.  D.  Einhorn. 


496 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


[July, 


light  upon  the  sense  in  which  the  Jews  ages  ago  interpreted 
the  Old  Testament.  Scripture,  for  the  most  part,  is  quoted 
literally.  Paraphrase  is  not  formally  attempted  ; and  when 
incidentally  introduced,  it  has  no  special  value.  There  are  here 
no  stores  of  quaint  Rabbinical  learning,  such  as  the  lamented 
Deutsch  delighted  to  exhume  from  the  Talmud.  The  He- 
brew of  this  volume  is  no  help  to  the  student  of  that  language, 
for  it  is  either  literally  quoted  from  the  Scriptures,  or  it  is 
carefully  modeled  after  the  pattern  of  the  sacred  writers.  He- 
brew, as  a language,  died  long  before  Christ  was  born.  Subse- 
quently it  was  carefully  embalmed  by  means  of  the  vowel  points 
and  the  accents.  No  mummy  ever  has  been  more  completely 
preserved  in  the  condition  in  which  it  was  left  when  the  process 
of  preparing  it  for  burial  was  concluded.  And  it  would  be 
about  as  reasonable  to  expect  the  mummy  to  awake  and  perform 
the  functions  of  life  as  to  look  now  for  any  manifestation  of 
. present  vitality  on  the  part  of  the  Hebrew  language.  The  use 
which  is  here  made  of  it  is  no  more  a natural,  living  outgrowth, 
than  are  the  exercises  which  the  student  writes  in  Latin  or 
Greek  composition  the  spontaneous  product  of  the  classic 
tongues.  The  Hebrew  of  this  book,  so  far  as  it  is  not  quota- 
tion from  the  Scriptures,  though  it  may  be  free  enough  from 
grammatical  fault,  is  no  better  than  an  imitation  of  a petrifac- 
tion, and  throws  no  light  on  the  difficult  problems  pertaining 
to  that  tongue. 

But  for  other  reasons  we  have  been  interested  and  profited 
by  the  perusal  of  the  Olath  Tamid.  It  joins  itself  to  the  re- 
mote past,  and  both  conducts  our  thoughts  in  that  direction, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  casts  light  upon  the  pathway.  Hence, 
provision  is  made  for  the  religious  commemoration  of  such 
events  as  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans,  deliv- 
erance by  the  Maccabees  in  the  time  of  Antiochus,  and  the 
overthrow  of  Haman  in  the  days  of  Esther  and  Mordecai.  We 
are  here  conducted  still  further  back,  beyond  the  era  of  Saky- 
amuni,  the  founder  of  Buddhism  ; beyond  the  era  of  Zoroaster 
and  the  fire-worshipers ; beyond  the  probable  era  of  the  old- 
est of  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hindus,  to  the  exodus  of  Israel, 
under  Moses,  fifteen  hundred  years  previous  to  the  birth  of 
Christ.  Provision  is  made  for  the  celebration  of  the  Passover 
which  was  originally  kept  at  that  remote  date.  True,  the  cer- 


iS77-] 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


497 


emonies  are  not  the  same  which  were  of  old  employed,  but  the 
change  is  explicitly  declared  to  be  made  because  of  a change 
in  the  circumstances  and  relations  of  Israel.  The  real  exist- 
ence of  the  ancient  rites  is  freely  conceded,  and  the  fact  of  the 
Exodus  is  received  without  question  as  the  reason  of  the 
modern  observance.  Here,  then,  is  a ceremony  which  dates 
back  its  origin  nearly  thirty-four  centuries.  It  is  the  latest 
link  in  a historical  chain  which  is  fastened,  as  to  its  other  end, 
in  Egypt  in  that  remote  period.  Through  this  long  interval, 
the  Passover  has  been,  with  slight  intermissions,  constantly 
observed.  And  it  is,  as  at  present  kept  among  the  Jews,  a 
monument  to  the  reality  of  the  event  which  it  commemorates, 
just  as  the  Lord’s  Supper  among  Christians,  having  been  cele- 
brated ever  since  the  death  of  Christ,  is  a witness  to  the  real- 
ity of  the  event  which  it  commemorates.  In  the  nature  of  the 
case  there  is  no  probability  that  either  of  them  would  or  could 
have  been  invented  and  successfully  imposed  upon  the  people 
without  a real  historical  origin,  for  they  both  point  distinctly 
to  truths  which  are  not  welcome  to  human  self-esteem — to 
bondage  on  the  part  of  Israel,  and  to  the  need  of  redemption 
on  the  part  of  Christians.  And  there  is  no  time  which  can  be 
fixed  when  such  an  imposition  could  first  have  been  success- 
fully introduced  among  Jews  or  Christians,  even  if,  in  the  na- 
ture of  the  case,  there  was  no  insuperable  obstacle.  We  can 
account  for  the  existence  of  the  Lord’s  Supper  only  by  the 
reality  of  Christ’s  death,  and  of  the  Passover  only  by  the  real- 
ity of  the  Exodus  under  Moses. 

But  it  is  not  for  this  historical  aspect  in  which  this  book  of 
prayers  may  be  viewed  that  it  is  most  worthy  of  the  study  of 
Christians.  It  is  chiefly  to  be  valued  on  account  of  the  light 
which  it  throws  upon  the  religious  doctrines  and  practices  of 
a part  of  the  Jewish  people  of  the  present  day.  Everything 
which  concerns  the  spiritual  condition  of  the  scattered  rem- 
nants of  Jacob’s  descendants  ought  profoundly  to  interest  us. 
And  we  believe  that,  as  a rule,  intelligent  Christians  both  de- 
sire to  know  their  views  and  are  anxious  for  their  welfare.  To 
them  the  Jew  is  not  an  object  to  be  despised  or  hated.  We 
cannot  forget  the  past  of  this  peculiar  people.  It  has  not 
merely  been  more  romantic,  more  tragic,  more  wonderful,  than 
that  of  any  other  branch  of  the  human  family,  or  even  than 


498 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


[July,. 


that  which  fiction  could  invent  when  taxing  the  imagination  to- 
the  utmost.  Over  and  above  this,  we  remember  that  they  were 
the  chosen  of  God  for  ages.  To  them  we  are  indebted  for  the 
perpetuation  of  the  church,  the  writing  and  preservation  of  the 
Old  Testament,  and  the  maintenance  of  true  religion  when  it 
everywhere  else  was  extinct.  Of  them  Christ  was  born,  and 
from  them  the  apostles  were  called.  And  they  still  have  a 
great  future  before  them.  Of  this,  the  fact  that  amid  all 
their  wanderings  and  persecutions  they  have  been  preserved, 
so  that  their  distinct  existence  as  a people,  though  without  a 
country  or  national  organization,  is  everywhere  maintained,  is 
a convincing,  presumptive  indication.  And  the  testimony  of 
the  New  Testament  is  absolutely  conclusive  on  this  point.  It 
does  not  foretell  their  restoration  to  Palestine,  or  the  re-erec- 
tion of  their  nationality,  but  it  does  assure  us  that  into  the 
Christian  commonwealth  the  whole  of  the  remnant  of  ancient 
Israel  will  be  brought.  And  this  will  be  inseparably  associated 
with  the  coming  of  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles.  The  latter 
event  will  be  the  signal  for  and  harbinger  of  the  former.  Mil- 
lennial glory  will  be  inaugurated  by  the  conversion  of  this  won- 
derful people. 

This  volume  is  a ritual  for  divine  worship,  public,  social  and 
domestic.  It  is  safe  to  assume,  therefore,  that  in  it  we  have 
an  expression  of  the  very  heart  of  the  religion  of  the  part  of 
the  Jewish  people  who  use  it.  For  those  who  prepare  a ritual 
of  worship  would  not  be  likely  to  put  into  it  anything  which 
they  do  not  regard  as  belonging  to  the  vitals  of  piety.  And 
its  effect  upon  those  who  use  it  is  to  conform  them  to  the  type 
of  religion  which  it  embodies.  It  is  true  that  this  volume 
does  not  profess  to  come  with  the  weight  of  any  ecclesiastical 
authority.  It  does  not  assume  to  bind  the  conscience.  But 
for  the  very  reason  that  it  is  voluntarily  received  by  the  peo- 
ple, it  is  all  the  more  to  be  regarded  as  an  expression  of  the 
genuine  religious  sentiments  of  those  who  employ  it. 

The  Jews  of  the  present  day  are  divided  as  to  their  religious 
doctrines  and  practices  into  three  great  general  classes.  One 
class  is  known  as  the  stationary , or  extreme  orthodox.  They 
are  mainly  found  in  Poland,  Russia,  Palestine,  and  in  some 
other  Asiatic  and  African  countries.  They  have  a profound 
reverence  for  the  Talmud,  and  for  the  forms  which  the  ecclesi- 


1877-] 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


499 


astical  authorities  prescribe  for  them.  They  still  look  to  Pal- 
estine as  their  country,  and  covet  to  be  buried  within  its  lim- 
its. Even  a handful  of  earth  brought  from  that  land  to  be 
scattered  in  the  grave,  is  regarded  as  a most  precious  treasure. 
They  long  for  the  restoration  of  Jewish  nationality,  and  com- 
pare their  present  state  to  that  of  their  forefathers,  when  they 
sat  down  by  the  rivers  of  Babylon  and  wept.  One  article  of 
their  creed,  as  compiled  by  Moses  Maimonides,  in  the  eleventh, 
century,  is:  “I  believe,  with  a perfect  faith,  that  the  Messiah 
is  yet  to  come;  and  although  he  retard  his  coming,  yet  I will 
wait  for  him  till  he  come.”  They  expect  that  the  Messiah 
will  bestow  the  sceptre  of  universal  dominion  on  the  house  of 
Judah. 

The  other  two  classes  both  owe  their  origin  to  the  influence 
more  immediately  of  Moses  Mendelsshon,  who  lived  in  the 
last  century,  but  more  remotely  to  Moses  Maimonides.  Both 
have  largely  thrown  off  the  narrow  notions  of  the  extreme  or- 
thodox. But  they  have  separated  into  two  schools.  One  is 
known  as  the  conservative , or  moderate  orthodox.  It  prevails 
especially  in  the  countries  of  Western  Europe.  This  school, 
while  characterized  by  emancipation  from  Talmudic  and  Rab- 
binical authority,  yet  shows  a tendency  to  subordination  tcx 
a regularly  constituted  ecclesiastical  head,  such  as  chief  Rabbi 
in  each  country.  They  have  an  intense  love  for  their  ancient 
land  and  forms  of  religion.  But  they  do  not  look  for  a return 
of  the  Jews  to  Palestine,  or  for  the  restoration  of  their  nation- 
ality in  any  sense  which  is  incompatible  with  citizenship  of  the 
world.  The  degree  of  rigidness  with  which  such  religious  du- 
ties as  are  prescribed  are  enforced,  varies  in  different  coun- 
tries. 

The  other  of  these  Jewish  schools  is  variously  known  as  the 
reformed , liberal , progressive , or  modern.  It  prevails  most  ex- 
tensively in  Germany,  Austria,  and  the  United  States.  Dr. 
Einhorn,  who  prepared  the  Olath  Tamid,  and  who  was  for- 
merly of  Germany,  but  is  now  of  the  United  States,  is  of  this 
way  of  thinking,  although  in  his  radicalism  he  is  scarcely  in 
the  front  of  his  party  at  the  present  time. . Most  of  the  Israel- 
itish  congregations  in  this  country  are  of  this  school.  So  wide 
has  been  the  demand  for  this  book,  that  several  successive 
editions  have  been  published.  Let  us  now  proceed  to  a more 


500 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


[July, 


minute  examination  of  the  religious  doctrines  which  it  embod- 
ies. We  will  thus  be  able  to  learn  what  are  some  of  the 
most  prominent  peculiarities  of  the  type  of  Judaism  which  it 
represents. 

Of  these  the  most  notable  relate  to  the  peculiar  office  and 
work  ascribed  to  the  Jewish  people.  First,  the  doctrine  of  the 
Messiah.  The  idea  of  a personal  Christ  is  renounced.  At  the 
same  time  a doctrine  of  the  Messiah  is  taught  in  the  most  un- 
equivocal manner.  What  is  to  be  understood  by  that  name  is 
not  treated  as  an  open  question.  The  Jewish  people  are 
THE  MESSIAH.  The  expression,  “ Israel,  thy  Messiah,  ” is  one 
of  the  most  common  in  the  book.  One  of  the  questions  to  be 
asked  of  the  candidate  at  confirmation  is,  whether  he  believes 
that  Israel  is  destined  to  fulfill  this  high  mission  as  the  Mes- 
siah of  all  mankind.  It  is  the  race  at  large  to  which  this 
name  is  given.  And  as  a part  of  this  doctrine,  a uni- 
versal priesthood  is  ascribed  to  this  people.  The  sacerdotal 
office  is  assumed  to  have  passed  from  the  one  family,  on  which 
it  was  conferred  by  the  law  of  Moses,  over  to  the  whole  nation. 

In  the  afternoon  service  for  the  Day  of  Atonement  the  reader 
is  to  say — “The  priestly  dignity  has  not  vanished  from  our 
midst,  but  it  has  passed  from  the  house  of  Aaron  to  the  whole 
community.”  And  again,  as  a priest,  Israel  is  represented  as 
performing  a double  work.  One  part  of  it  is  to  suffer.  His 
sufferings  are  not  understood  to  be  a real  satisfaction  to  the 
offended  law  and  justice  of  God ; but  in  his  work  as  a world- 
redeeming  people,  suffering  is  a consequence,  and  so  becomes  a 
necessity  to  the  removal  of  human  guilt.  We  quote  again 
from  the  afternoon  service  for  the  Day  of  Atonement  : “Not  as 
a penitent  sinner,  but  as  a suffering  Messiah,  Israel  had  to  go 
forth  into  the  world — abandoning  his  ancient  home,  with 
its  temple,  its  sacrifices,  and  its  priest-pageants,  with  all  its  typ- 
ical and  preparatory  institutions,  jin  order  to  found  every- 
where seats  of  the  true  worship,  and  by  self-sacrificing  devo- 
tion to  lead  the  nations  to  atonement.  At  once  priest  and  tool 
of  atonement,  he  was  sent,  like  the  sacrificial  goat  of  old,  into 
the  wilderness,  to  take  the  guilt  of  mankind  upon  his  shoulders, 
and  carry  it  off.*  The  other  part  of  his  priestly  work  is  to  be  a 


* The  Italics  are  from  the  book. 


1877-] 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


501 


spiritual  teacher  and  guide  for  the  nations  of  the  earth.  At 
Confirmation,  the  candidate  is  to  be  asked  whether  he  believes 
“ that  God  has  chosen  Israel  to  be  his  priest-people,  to  propa- 
gate by  his  character,  his  wonderful  fate,  and  his  unwearied 
struggle,  the  doctrine  of  sanctification  all  over  the  earth,  and 
unite  all  men  in  the  true  knowledge  and  worship  of  God.” 

Second , The  redemption  of  the  world.  This  doctrine  is  in- 
separably associated  with  the  other  which  has  just  been  con- 
sidered. By  virtue  of  the  Messiahship  of  the  Jewish  people  and 
of  their  priestly  office,  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  are  to  be 
brought  to  the  knowledge  and  practice  of  the  truth,  as  it  is 
committed  to  the  charge  of  Israel,  and  thus  the  brotherhood 
of  all  men  is  to  be  re-established.  They  are  taught  here,  in 
the  prayers,  to  speak  of  themselves  as  “ a world-redeeming 
race.”  A proselyte,  at  his  reception  in  the  synagogue,  is  re- 
quired to  profess  his  belief  that  “ God  has  chosen  Israel  to  be  his 
priest-people,  and  ordained  him  to  propagate  the  doctrine  of 
the  Only-One,  and  of  his  holy  will  among  all  the  inhabitants 
of  the  earth  ; that  through  the  mediation  of  Israel,  the  true 
knowledge  and  worship  of  God  will  one  day  become  the 
common  good  of  mankind  ; and  that  the  time  of  such  brotherly 
union  of  all  nations  in  God  will  be  the  true  kingdom  of  the 
Messiah.” 

It  must  be  conceded  that  these  two  doctrines  relating  to  the 
peculiar  office  and  work  of  the  Jewish  people  are  calculated  to 
arrest  attention.  In  Judaism  the  reception  of  them  as  a part 
of  a creed  constitutes  a new  departure.  For  ages  it  was  uni- 
versal among  Jews  to  believe  in  a personal  Messiah.  At- 
tempts in  the  past  were  made  to  fix  the  time  of  His  appear- 
ance, until,  on  account  of  repeated  disappointments,  the  Rab- 
binical edict  was  issued,  “ Cursed  is  he  who  calculates  the 
time  of  the  Messiah’s  coming.”  Some  still  look  for  a personal 
Christ  to  appear.  Others  leave  it  an  open  question  whether 
the  Messiah  is  a person,  a time,  or  an  event.  But  those  who 
hold  with  this  book,  turn  their  backs  alike  upon  the  traditions 
of  the  past  and  the  uncertainties  of  the  present,  and  say  that 
the  Jews  themselves  are  the  Messiah.  The  departure  which  is 
thus  taken,  also  has  the  merit  of  boldness.  It  is  a daring  thing 
for  a party,  claiming  to  be  liberal  beyond  others,  to  assert  for 
their  race  an  office  and  work  which  renders  their  place  among 

(New  Series , No.  22.) 


32 


502 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


[July, 


the  nations  as  unique  in  the  present  and  future  as  it  ever  was, 
according  to  the  most  conservative,  in  the  past.  And  if  the 
scrutiny  is  not  too  close,  these  doctrines  may  seem  to  satisfy 
some  existing  facts,  and  some  Scriptural  testimonies.  They 
may  appear  to  explain  why,  ever  since  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  and  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews,  that  people,  al- 
though so  widely  scattered,  and  exposed  to  so  many  persecu- 
tions, has  been  so  wonderfully  preserved  and  kept  distinct. 
There  are  Messianic  prophecies  also  which  might  be  forced 
into  a semblance  of  harmony  with  these  ideas,  although  they' 
cannot  be  said  positively  to  teach  them.  For  example:  “Judah, 
thou  art  he  whom  thy  brothers  praise.  . . . The  sceptre 

shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor  a law-giver  from  between  his 
feet,  until  Shiloh  come  ; and  unto  him  shall  the  gathering  of 
the  people  be.” — (Gen.  xlix : 8,  io.) 

But  a little  more  careful  scrutiny  of  facts  and  Scripture 
shows  these  doctrines  to  be  without  a solid  foundation.  Space 
will  not  here  permit  the  full  statement  of  the  arguments 
against  them.  Nor  is  this  necessary,  for  the  most  part,  for 
those  who  shall  read  this  article.  But  it  is  to  be  remarked  that 
existing  facts  do  not  point  to  the  Messiahship  of  the  Jewish 
people.  They  are  not  leading  the  nations  to  God.  Proselyt- 
ism  to  Judaism  is  a rare  occurrence  anywhere.  And  outside 
of  the  pale  of  Judaism,  so  far  as  progress  is  making  by  the 
nations  toward  a higher  religious  condition,  it  is  mainly 
through  the  instrumentality  of  Christians.  If  we  turn  from 
existing  facts  to  the  Scriptures,  we  notice  that  in  all  the  thirty- 
nine  times  in  which  the  Hebrew  word  ( Mashiach ) oc- 

curs in  the  Old  Testament,  it  is  not  once  applied  distinctly  to 
the  Jewish  people.  And  the  same  is  true  in  regard  to  the 
other  titles  of  the  Messiah  which  are  there  employed.  This 
of  itself  is  presumptive  evidence  against  such  an  application 
as  that  which  this  book  makes  of  the  name.  The  Scriptures 
also  plainly  point  to  a person  as  the  Messiah.  The  circle 
within  which  he  is  to  appear,  according  to  the  first  promise,  is 
wide  as  the  race.  But  in  all  the  subsequent  predictions  there 
is  a gradual  limitation,  until  eventually  the  circle  is  narrower 
even  than  a tribe  in  Israel.  The  house  of  David  is  to  have  the 
honor  of  his  lineage.  It  must  be  a person,  therefore,  that  is 
meant.  Indeed,  he  is  so  designated  by  the  use  of  pronouns,. 


1877-] 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


503 


just  as  unequivocally  as  it  is  possible.  It  is  worthy  of  note, 
too,  that  this  doctrine  of  the  Messiah  leaves  the  ritual  of  the 
Levitical  law  without  any  adequate  meaning.  The  sacrifices 
and  the  washings  then  were  not  clearly  the  types  of  better 
things  to  come.  And  what  becomes  of  the  reign  of  the 
Messiah,  which  is  so  abundantly  foretold  ? The  idea  held  out 
is  that  the  time  of  “ brotherly  union  of  all  nations  in  God  will 
be  the  true  kingdom  of  the  Messiah.”  But  if  the  Jewish  peo- 
ple are  the  Messiah,  this  is  not  his  reign.  All  nations  will 
have  an  equal  part  in  it. 

The  truth  is  that  it  is  manifest  that  this  whole  doctrine  of 
the  Messiah  is  a theory  to  which  an  exigency  has  driven  its 
propagators.  It  is  not  here  meant  that  they  are  not  honest 
in  its  adoption.  We  concede  the  fullest  measure  of  sincerity. 
But  the  swelling  floods  of  modern  progress  have  borne  this  Jew- 
ish party  away  from  the  old  moorings.  It  has  to  them  become 
necessary  to  find  a new  ground  upon  which  to  cast  anchor,  or 
be  carried  entirely  away  from  Judaism.  This  doctrine  has  been 
accepted  as  furnishing  the  best  refuge  which  is  available.  How 
unsatisfactory  it  is  when  compared  with  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  the  Messiah  ! The  character  of  Jesus  harmonizes  with  all 
of  the  Messianic  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament.  He 
fulfills  the  types  of  the  ancient  ritual.  He,  by  his  word  and 
his  works,  proved  himself  to  be  the  Christ.  In  him  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  are  being  blessed,  and  shall  be  still  more 
in  the  future.  He  has  already  suffered,  and  here  on  earth  in 
some  form  he  shall  yet  reign  from  sea  to  sea. 

Some  of  the  other  doctrines  and  practices  inculcated  in  this 
book  it  will  be  sufficient  briefly  to  mention.  Upon  the  subject 
of  divine  revelation,  the  most  explicit  statement  is  the  follow- 
ing, from  the  questions  for  Confirmation  : “ Do  you  believe 
that  God,  the  purest  and  most  perfect  spirit,  reveals  himself  to 
man  in  the  spirit,  according  to  his  essence  and  will,  in  order 
that  man  may  walk  in  his  ways  and  sanctify  himself  in  thought, 
word,  and  deed,  after  the  sublime  model  of  Divine  holiness  ; 
and  that  the  doctrine  revealed  on  Sinai  to  Moses,  the  greatest 
of  all  the  prophets,  is  truly  Divine,  and  destined  and  apt  to 
lead  to  such  sanctification?”  Here  it  is  noteworthy  that  “the 
doctrine  revealed  on  Sinai  to  Moses”  is  alone  specified  as 
Divine.  God  also  is  declared  to  reveal  himself  “ to  man  in 


504 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


[July. 


the  spirit.”  The  language  seems  to  look  decidedly  in  the 
direction  of  rationalism.  And  yet  it  cannot  be  said  that  ra- 
tionalism is  anywhere  taught  unequivocally  in  the  book. 

Original  sin  is  explicitly  denied.  Nothing  is  affirmed  in  re- 
gard to  the  fall  of  man.  But  it  is  frequently  declared  that  the 
moral  nature  with  which  we  enter  the  world  is  holy.  The 
proselyte,  at  his  reception  in  the  synagogue,  is  required  to  pro- 
fess before  God  that  “man,  like  all  other  beings,  has  come  pure 
and  good  from  thy  hand,  being  born  free  from  the  stain  of  sin, 
and  is  naturally  capable  to  conquer  sin  completely.” 

There  is  no  vicarious  sacrifice  for  sin,  according  to  this  book. 
The  sacrifices  of  the  ancient  ritual  were  more  or  less  typical. 
The  Messiah  suffers,  but  his  sufferings  are  in  no  sense  a satis- 
faction to  the  law  and  justice  of  God.  They  are  the  conse- 
quence merely  of  the  relation  of  the  Jewish  people  to  the 
other  nations.  And  no  satisfaction  for  guilt  is  required  in 
order  to  reconciliation  with  God.  Repentance  and  holy  living 
are  sufficient.  In  the  afternoon  service  for  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment, the  reader  says:  “The  sacrifices  and  the  altar  thou 
hast  taken  from  us,  but  not  their  essence,  not  the  atonement, 
not  the  power  of  sanctifying  our  heart-blood  for  thy  holy 
service — which  he  who  is  conscious  of  guilt  can  execute  but  in 
his  spirit,  and  everywhere,  as  ever ; not  thy  forgiving  love 
which  is  always  ready  to  receive  him  who  repents  and  desires 
to  return  to  the  paternal  lap,  and  for  which  there  is  no  limit  of 
time  or  space.”  The  proselyte,  in  his  profession,  says,  before 
God  : “ The  intimate  communion  between  thee,  O most  holy, 
and  man,  is  brought  about  by  no  other  mediation  than  that  of 
the  imperishable  spirit  dwelling  in  us,  and  is  chiefly  promoted  by 
strict  obedience  to  the  revealed  word,  and  even  the  sinner  can 
find  atonement  and  redemption  if  he  returns  to  thee  in  sincere 
repentance.” 

The  following  question  in  the  formula  for  the  reception  of 
proselytes,  although  general  in  the  wording,  seems  to  be 
aimed  especially  at  the  Christian  faith  as  to  the  incarnation  of 
Godin  Christ  Jesus:  “ Do  you  believe  that  he,  the  inscrutable 
spirit  of  all  spirits,  can  never  assume  the  form  of  any  being 
that  is  in  heaven  or  on  earth  ? ” 

Prayers  for  the  dead  are  provided.  After  the  interment  the 
Reader  says  at  the  grave : “ May  the  Lord  place  under  his 


1 377-] 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


505 


almighty  protection  the  returning  soul,  that  it  may  behold  his 
loveliness,  and  dwell  in  his  sanctuary  ; that  peace  may  follow  it 
and  sooth  its  resting-place.  May  God  be  thy  guardian,  O 
slumbering  friend  ; thy  shadow  on  thy  right  side.  May  God 
preserve  thee  from  all  evil,  and  guard  thy  soul  ; may  he  pro- 
tect thy  going  in  and  going  out,  now  and  through  eternity.” 
A similar  prayer  is  to  be  said  subsequently  in  the  house  of 
mourning.  Indeed,  the  rabbinical  influence  is  more  apparent 
in  the  burial  ceremonies  than  anywhere  else  in  the  book.  It 
is  natural  that  it  should  here  last  lose  its  hold.  People  are 
always  slow  to  cast  off  customs  which  are  by  long  usage  asso- 
ciated with  proper  respect  for  the  dead.  We  have  here  in  its 
peculiar  Hebrew  form  the  kaddish  which  is  to  be  said  by  the 
reader,  mourners,  and  friends  at  the  grave. 

We  rise  from  the  examination  of  this  volume  with  mingled 
feelings.  There  is  in  some  of  the  forms  a pathos  which  touches 
the  heart.  This  is  especially  true  in  regard  to  certain  of  the 
utterances  in  regard  to  the  past  history  of  the  Jewish  people. 
The  voice  is  not  that  of  wailing,  but  it  has  an  undertone  of 
sadness  which  sounds  like  mournful  music.  But  the  dominant 
spirit  of  the  book  is  of  a different  character.  It  is  meant  to 
kindle  the  feeling  that  the  Jewish  people  have  a sublime  mis- 
sion in  the  present  and  the  future.  And  as  we  read  we  cannot 
avoid  sympathy  with  the  general  object,  although  we  cannot 
accept  the  particular  form  in  which  it  is  presented.  And  we 
wonder  what  will  be  the  influence  of  such  religious  forms  upon 
the  Jewish  people.  In  one  direction  it  looks  toward  the  per- 
petuation of  a feeling  of  separation  from  other  nations.  They 
are  taught  to  regard  themselves  as  the  Messiah.  But  in  an- 
other direction  it  looks  toward  a breaking  down  of  the  barriers 
by  which  hitherto  they  have  preserved  their  isolation.  Much 
that  is  distinctly  Jewish  in  the  services  of  religion  is  aban- 
doned. There  is  a longing  for  a close  fellowship  with  the 
whole  race  of  mankind.  The  ultimate  aim  presented  is  the 
accomplishment  of  universal  brotherhood  in  God.  Is  this 
form  of  Judaism  a mere  episode?  Is  it  a slight  temporary 
departure  from  the  general  course  of  the  stream?  Or  is  it  a 
new  channel  which  is  begun  to  be  opened,  and  into  which  the 
waters  will  more  and  more  pour  themselves,  until  the  whole 
volume  empties  itself  at  length  by  this  way  into  the  sea  ? We 


506 


A Jewish  Prayer  Book. 


[July, 


are  confident  at  least  of  one  thing.  It  is  that  this  modern 
form  of  Judaism  is  one  of  the  methods  by  which  God  is  pre- 
paring his  ancient  people,  in  the  fullness  of  time,  to  receive 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the  promised  Messiah  and  the  Redeemer 
of  men. 

“ Come  then,  thou  great  Deliverer,  come  ; 

The  veil  from  Jacob’s  heart  remove  ; 

O bring  thine  ancient  people  home, 

And  let  them  know  thy  dying  love.  ” 


Art.  VIII.— WHAT  IS  TRUTH? 

By  Prof.  Jacob  Cooper,  D.C.L.,  Rutgers  College. 

This  is  a question  of  prime  importance,  since  it  underlies 
all  moral  and  metaphysical  speculation.  Moreover,  all  pro- 
gress in  knowledge  assumes  not  only  the  existence  of  Truth, 
but  that  it  can  in  part  be  discovered.  This  question  is,  at  the 
same  time,  a crucial  test  by  which  to  determine  the  character 
of  the  inquirer ; for  it  is  easy  or  difficult  to  answer  according 
to  the  temper  of  mind  in  which  it  is  approached.  He  who  de- 
sires to  know,  and  is  willing  to  receive  with  becoming  humility 
the  response  to  this  momentous  inquiry,  will  invariably  find  a 
solution  to  his  immediate  difficulties,  which  is  all  that  can  rea- 
sonably be  demanded.  For  if  light  be  given  at  each  succes- 
sive step,  the  conditions  of  life  are  met ; since  this  exists  only 
in  the  present,  and  each  moment  is  a stepping  stone  to  that 
which  is  beyond. 

But,  if  we  will  receive  an  answer  to  any  question,  it  must  be 
propounded  according  to  the  conditions  under  which  the  sub- 
ject of  inquiry  presents  itself  to  us.  Neither  Nature*  nor 
Revelation  will  be  forced  to  testify  and  yield  their  secrets  ex- 
cept to  those  who  come  into  full  sympathy  with  them. 

The  question  concerning  the  nature  of  Truth  is  as  old  as 
speculative  philosophy,  and  the  responses  given  have  been 
most  diverse.  Frequently  it  has  been  asked  contemptuously, 


* Bacon,  Nov.  Organum,  Lib.  I.,  Aph.  III.  N atura  enim  non  nisi  parendo  vin- 
citur. 


1877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


507 


under  the  belief  that  it  could  not  be  answered ; and  this 
rendered  the  questioner  both  averse  to  the  labor  necessary  to 
find  a solution,  and  unwilling  to  accept  it  if  offered.  Besides, 
a fruitless  search  in  the  wrong  way  begets  doubt,  since  the 
mind  is  prone  to  conclude  that  what  it  does  not  find  after 
laborious  effort,  cannot  be  discovered.  For  men  readily  adopt 
the  doctrine  of  Protagoras,*  and  make  themselves  the  measure 
of  all  things  ; and  hence  believe  that  what  does  not  submit  to 
this  standard  does  not  exist,  or  is  not  worth  the  discovery. 

Truth,  in  its  essential  nature,  is  one  of  those  primary  no- 
tions which  are  so  simple  that  they  cannot  be  explained  ; since 
any  of  the  terms  employed  in  the  definition  are  more  obscure 
than  the  thing  to  be  defined.  For  a necessary  condition  of  a 
definition  is  that  it  makes  something  clear,  which  before  was 
dark.  The  labored  efforts  to  explain  this  notion  in  words  have, 
therefore,  been  misspent ; and  the  results,  assuming  the  protean 
shape  of  the  terms  employed  to  elucidate,  have  diverted  at- 
tention from  the  real  object  of  pursuit.  This  has  led  Pyrrho, 
Democritus,  and  their  many  followers,  to  doubt  the  existence 
of  Truth  ; and,  as  a necessary  consequence,  to  believe  nothing. 
For  if  there  be  not  this  foundation  to  build  upon,  of  course 
there  cannot  be  knowledge,  and  this  unbelief  is  a magician’s 
serpent,  which  does  not  merely  swallow  up  all  others,  but,  if 
consistent,  swallows  itself.  The  trouble,  however,  in  such 
definitions,  arises  because  that  has  been  attempted  which 
is  impossible  from  the  nature  of  the  case  to  be  done,  save  by 
a superior  intelligence.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that  he  who  gave 
understanding  to  men,  can,  if  he  choses,  make  primary  notions 
more  clear  than  they  now  are  to  us,  either  by  strengthening 
the  intellectual  powers,  or  by  presenting  the  idea  in  a different 
view.  This  might  be  done  by  resolving  that  which  is  to  us, 
with  our  present  powers,  a primary  notion,  into  something  more 
elementary  ; or  by  elucidating  the  idea  through  its  relations. 
The  latter  was  done  by  our  Lord,  when  on  trial  before  the 
Roman  governor,  through  the  explanation  of  an  abstract 
primary  conception  by  means  of  a concrete  example.  This  is, 
indeed,  the  most  satisfactory  sort  of  elucidation ; for  nothing 

* Plato  Theaet.,  152  A.  Ilpoorayopai  a>ri<5i  yap  nov  navrcov  xPVnaTOOV 
perpov  arS poonov  sivai,  r&3V  psv  ovrcjv , e6n,  icov  8s  pi)  ovrcov, 

.£»S  ovk  e6tiv. 


5o8 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


can  be  clearer  than  the  exhibition  of  a principle  in  its  actual 
working.  Accordingly,  the  definition  by  which  Christ  declared 
himself  to  be  the  embodiment  of  the  Truth,  becomes  clearly 
intelligible  through  its  relations.  Guided,  then,  by  this  author- 
itative utterance,  we  may  adequately  define  Truth  to  be:  CON- 
FORMITY TO  THE  Will  OF  God.*  This  may  be  described- 
further  as  : The  relations  of  things  established  by  the  Divine 
Will,  and  which  are  expressed  in  the  creation  and  government 
of  the  universe. 

A moment’s  reflection  will  satisfy  any  professed  Theist  that 
the  relations  of  things,  both  physical  and  moral,  are  not  for- 
tuitous, but  exist  in  the  modes  we  find  them  because  the 
Creator  fixed  them  so.  Whether  he  could,  consistently  with 
the  Divine  character,  have  arranged  all  things  in  different 
relations  toward  each  other,  is  no  question  of  ours  ; for  we 
have  to  deal  with  them  as  they  are,  not  as  they  might  be  con- 
ceived to  have  been  made.  Yet  we  know  it  must  be  the  will 
of  a perfectly  independent  originator  to  dispose  those  things 
which  he  has  created  in  that  way  which  seems  good  to  him- 
self. For  before  the  act  of  creation,  the  choice  to  form  a 
universe  of  matter  and  spirit  must  depend  on  himself  alone  ; 
and  out  of  all  the  possibilities  within  the  reach  of  infinite  re- 
source, that  must  be  selected  which  conforms  to  his  will.  “He 
spake  and  it  was  done  ; he  commanded  and  it  stood  fast.’' 
Thus  the  simple  reason  why  we  find  the  relations  of  moral  and 
physical  nature  to  be  what  they  are,  is  because  God  willed  them 
to  be  in  this  way  rather  than  any  other.  Hence,  the  idea  of 
morality  or  physical  law  existing  independently,  or  being  ante- 
cedent to  the  will  of  God  expressed  in  their  constitution,  is  an 
absurdity.  The  question  indeed,  mooted  by  Kant,  “whether 
it  is  conceivable  that  the  universe  could  have  been  created  on 
any  other  principle,  as,  for  example,  that  the  truths  of  geometry, 
physics,  or  morals,  would  have  been  diametrically  opposite  to 
what  we,  as  now  constituted,  apprehend  them  to  be,”  has  no 
relevancy  to  our  subject.  It  is  conceivable,  we  think,  because 
we  are  not  limited  by  our  experience  in  making  postulates. 


* The  “ Will  of  God  ” is  not  employed  to  denote  a single  one  of  the  Divine 
attributes,  but  the  result  and  expression  of  all  in  harmonious  action.  The  dis- 
tinction between  the  ethical  and  voluntary  character  of  the  Divine  Nature  is  not 
well  taken,  and  shows  confusion  of  thought  in  those  who  contrast  these  attributes.. 


i877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


509 

Hence,  any  supposition  contrary  to  fact  may  be  entertained, 
even  contradictory  to  the  senses,  and  may  be  thought  of 
apart  from  all  its  relations,  without  involving  absurdity  merely 
by  its  conception.  But  the  instant  we  connect  it  with  the 
order  of  thought,  such  conception  falls  to  the  ground. 

Truth,  then,  being  the  conformity  to  the  will  of  God,  as 
made  known  to  us  by  its  expression  in  creation  and  the 
Divine  government,  it  follows: 

1.  This  Truth  is  one  and  indivisible,  save  in  thought,  wher- 
ever it  is  found.  It  would  be  impossible,  without  writing  a his- 
tory of  speculative  philosophy,  to  discuss  all  the  theories  which 
have  been  held  respecting  the  essence  and  relations  of  Truth. 
For  every  inquiry  after  new  facts,  every  investigation  of  unex- 
plained phenomena,  is  only  a question  about  Truth  in  its  appli- 
cations. A search  after  its  essence  embodies  the  substance  of 
Realism ; while  the  substitution  of  a name  instead  of  the 
essence  in  each  case  where  truth  exists,  is  Nominalism.  Both 
these  conflicting  systems,  however,  are  only  species  embraced 
under  a higher  genus,  and  are  coordinate  in  our  conception  of 
Truth.  Plato,  and  those  who  follow  him,  hold  that  names, 
whether  general  or  particular  terms,  represent  actually  exist- 
ing things,  and  these  are  ideas  or  images  which  have  had  a 
being  from  all  eternity,  and  were  the  patterns  after  which  God 
created  the  world.*  Hence,  the  embodiment  of  these  ideas 
in  creation  are  the  manifestations  of  Nov ? as  AtjpiovpyoS,  a 
Divine  Intelligence.!  This  is  Realism,  and  so  far  presents  no 
objectionable  features,  because  we  are  compelled  to  believe 
that  God  created  the  universe  according  to  his  pleasure,  and 
that  each  thing  made  was  fashioned  in  conformity  to  an  act  of 
his  will.  Those,  again,  who  follow  Aristotle  and  reject  Real- 
ism, discern  in  the  name  of  a thing  no  actual  existence,  but 
merely  a sign  by  which  it  is  signified.  Yet  these  have  in  mind 
some  energy,  blind  or  intelligent,  according  to  their  attitude 
toward  Theism,  which,  while  known  to  us  only  by  name, 
because  it  cannot  be  apprehended  by  the  senses,  produces  a 

* Timaeus,  38  C.  Kai  nard  to  nocpdSEiypa  rrjS  cdoovidt  cpvdEcpi,  iv  co? 
ojuoioraroS  aurai  Kara  Svvapiv  ■//•  to  per  ycip  Sr/  TtapaSeiy/ia  ndvTa 
aiaova  eStiv  or,  6 S'  ecu  Sid  reXovS  Tor  ditavTa  xporov  ysyorcuS  te  nai 
cor  real  edopErovS. 

f Parmenides,  132  D.  Td  pir  EiSr/  TavtX  arditsp  TtadaSsiypaTa  kdTarai 
ev  rrj  cpudEi,  tcc  S'  aXXcc  tovtoiS  koixsrai  xca  Eivai  opoioopaTCc. 


5io 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


world  from  nothing,  or  develops  it  from  matter  eternally  exist- 
ing. Truth,  according  to  this  view,  is  the  correspondence  with 
things  as  they  are  ;*  and  the  existence  of  all  things  must  be 
conformed  to  the  Supreme  will,  whether  that  be  conceived  of 
as  a personal  God,  or  as  the  laws  of  Nature.  So  we  see  that 
the  earliest  schools  into  which  all  metaphysical  speculation  has 
been  divided,  agree  in  this,  that  Truth  is  conformity  to  the 
supreme  directing  power.  Indeed,  according  to  the  deep 
utterance  of  Coleridge,  all  men  must  be  either  Platonists  or 
Aristotelians  ; that  is,  must  accept  one  or  the  other  view  of 
the  relation  of  mind  to  matter.  Hence,  if  the  universe  be  a 
creation,  Truth  is  the  conformity  of  the  thing  made  to  the  will 
of  the  Maker ; and  if  it  be  a development,  this  is  conformity 
to  the  law  of  growth.  Undoubtedly  the  Platonic  idea  is  more 
agreeable  to  Christian  modes  of  thought ; and,  accordingly, 
his  whole  philosophic  system  readily  adapted  itself  to  the 
doctrines  of  Revelation.  For  if  the  Greek  thought  of  the  world 
being  made  after  the  ideas  which  were  taken  by  the  Divine 
mind  as  models,  the  Jews  believed  that  not  only  all  the 
articles  of  ceremonial  worship  were  fashioned  after  the  pattern 
shown  to  Moses  in  the  Mount, f but  also  the  entire  earthly 
system  was  a transcript  of  the  heavenly.:]:  The  Christian 

notion  that  Jesus  was  the  instrument  by  which  the  universe 
was  made,  and  is  the  Divine  energy  pervading  all  things, 
agrees  well  with  the  Platonic  conception  of  preexistent  types. 
For  as  the  Idea  was  in  the  Nov 5 or  Divine  Mind  from  all 
eternity,  so  the  Only  Begotten  was  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father. 
And  as  the  embodiment  of  the  Idea  produced  a visible  world, § 
so  the  Eternal  Father  was  declared  in  the  person  and  work  of 
the  Son. | The  Christian  Church  was  perfectly  justified  in 
holding  that  Christ  was  the  Truth  itself,  for  he  distinctly  de- 
clared this  fact.  And  as  he  was  the  Truth,  both  personified 
and  embodied,  so  he  knew  no  will  but  God’s,  and  did  no  work 
but  his.  Through  him  was  the  will  of  God  actualized  ; since 
without  him  was  not  anything  made  that  was  made.^f  Thus 


* Aristot.  Met.,  993  Bekk.  ӣ162/'  ehcc6tov  ojS  e'xei  zov  Eivai,  ovtgq  xai  riji 
.dhr/tbaEiS. 

f Numb,  xxv  : 40.  f Ezekiel  xl-xlvni. 

$ Plato  Timaeus,  37,  C.  D.  ||  John  i : 14,  18. 


IF  John  i : 3. 


1877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


51 1 

the  Divine  purpose  was  revealed  through  him  to  the  compre- 
hension of  men  ; and  as  he  acted  in  perfect  conformity  to  the 
Divine  will,  his  whole  life  was  a continued  exhibition  of  the 
Truth,  not  merely  as  a mental  abstraction,  but  realized  in  a 
concrete  example.  The  pious  believer  views  Christ  as  the 
expression  of  the  will  of  God,  who  sums  up  in  himself  all  that 
we  can  know  of  Deity  or  his  works.  And  so,  in  Christian  logic, 
he  is  the  middle  term  of  comparison  through  which  alone  the 
creature  can  know  the  Creator.  Hence,  when  the  saintly  and 
acute  Malebranche  would  see  all  things  in  God,  this  means 
that  nothing  can  be  known  in  its  absolute  verity,  except  when 
viewed  in  its  relations  to  the  Divine  nature. 

Now,  if  Truth  be  conformity  to  the  Divine  Will,  it  must  be 
one  and  indivisible,  except  in  thought.  Plato  got  a glimpse 
of  this  oneness,  and  struggled  hard  to  develop  the  doctrine, 
but  was  forced  to  admit  that  it  transcends  finite  intelligence.* 
There  cannot  be  two  wills  about  the  same  thing,  without  being 
either  identical,  which  is  absurd ; or  at  variance,  which  would 
involve  a contradiction  inconsistent  with  the  Divine  character. 
This  conformity  is  seen  perfectly  in  the  order  of  the  natural 
world.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  error  or  conflict  here. 
Nature  is  everywhere  constant  to  herself,  and  exhibits  unity  of 
plan  and  ultimate  design.  Every  process  of  scientific  investi- 
gation proceeds  upon  the  constancy  maintained  by  the  laws  of 
Nature,  whether  they  be  themselves  a directing  power,  or 
-merely  the  expression  of  God’s  will.  However  much  a scientist 
may  question  the  dicta  of  morals,  or  doubt  the  existence  of  a 
higher  Intelligence  which  directs  the  movements  of  matter, 
still  he  is  positive  in  his  belief  in  the  constancy  of  those  laws 
which  govern  the  material  world.  He  experiments  with  the 
view  of  obtaining  a particular  result ; he  interrogates  matter 
by  his  crucibles,  his  scales  or  his  glass,  in  the  full  assurance 
that  if  he  asks  aright,  the  correct  answer  will  be  given.  More- 
over, he  is  equally  sure  that  the  answer  is  correct  whether  it 
establish  or  demolish  his  theory ; and  hence,  no  matter  how 
many  times  he  fail  to  attain  his  object,  the  interrogation  is 
renewed  again  with  as  much  confidence  in  the  constancy  of 
Nature’s  laws  as  though  he  had  not  failed  a single  time.  Thus 
far  he  is  consistent,  because  he  rests  on  the  firm  basis  that 


* Plato  Republic,  511,  A.  B. 


512 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


whatever  nature  responds  is  true.  But  when  he  pushes  his 
theory  so  far  as  to  substitute  the  process  by  which  force  acts 
on  matter,  or  the  laws  which  regulate  this  movement  for  that 
Intelligence  which  directs  and  gives  efficacy  to  those  laws, 
then  he  forsakes  his  own  method.  For  he  attempts  to  put  the 
mode  by  which  Intelligence  acts  in  place  of  that  Intelligence, 
the  result  of  force  for  force  itself.  With  jealous  incredulity  he 
guards  the  process  up  to  the  chasm  between  mind  and  matter, 
then  makes  the  leap  from  the  natural,  and,  as  he  acknowledges 
no  spiritual,  lands  nowhere.  Even  when  he  is  aware  by  the 
highest  of  all  knowledge,  distinct  consciousness,  that  his  de- 
termination to  try  an  experiment  is  wholly  distinct  from  the 
bodily  act,  still  he  assumes,  in  the  face  of  his  own  rigid  method, 
a generative  force  in  those  materials  which  his  senses  teach 
him  act  only  as  they  are  acted  upon.  Here  is  the  greatest 
absurdity  of  all  the  ages.  Cicero  well  said  there  is  no 
tenet  so  absurd  that  it  has  not  found  some  philosopher  to  ad- 
vocate it.*  And  surely  there  is  none  comparable  to  this, 
that  while  all  the  operations  of  Nature  are  invariable,  that  they 
are  so  fortuitously  because  nothing  has  made  them  constant. 
But  when  we  listen  to  the  voice  of  reason  speaking  within  us, 
or  the  word  of  Revelation  without  us,  we  recognize  a universe 
which  is  not  the  result  of  chance.  The  stones  and  minerals 
beneath  our  feet  did  not  create  themselves  out  of  star  dust 
(which,  like  Topsy,  “ growed  ”),  nor,  by  fortuitous  jumble,  ar- 
ranged themselves  with  mathematical  accuracy.  The  forces  of 
Nature  did  not  correlate  themselves;  since  these  are, per  se, 
repellant,  and  do  not  spontaneously  combine  for  concerted 
action.  As  well  might  a conflagration  collect  and  arrange  the 
materials  so  as  to  build  up  a Chicago  in  a night.  It  would  be 
absurd  indeed  to  expect  that  an  explosion  of  nitro-glycerine 
would  build  a ship,  and  direct  it  successfully  through  a long 
voyage.  But  what  shall  we  say  of  the  theory,  that  Titanic 
forces,  without  an  intelligent  master,  elaborated  this  world  of 
marvellous  symmetry  and  beauty,  then  directed  it  on  its  voy- 
age, not  for  a day  or  a year,  but  from  age  to  age,  impelling  it 
on  its  course  without  stop  or  collision  ? Yet  this  is  only  one  of 
an  infinite  number  of  similar  spheres  sailing  through  space,  in  a 
system  of  connected  orbits  so  intricate  that  no  calculus  of 

*Cicero,  De.  Div.,  II.,  119:  Nescio  quomodo  nihil  tam  absurde  dici  potest  quod 
non  dicatur  ab  aliquo  philosophorum. 


1877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


513 


earth  can  grasp  its  movements.  To  believe  that  this  is  all 
effected  by  fortuitous  impulse,  does  violence  to  common 
sense,  and  proves  the  mind  which  clings  to  such  a theory  unfit 
for  rational  speculation.  For  no  person,  not  wilfully  blind, 
can  fail  to  see  that  undirected  force  segregates  rather  than 
aggregates,  and  destroys  instead  of  creating.  Thus  the  mind 
instinctively  recognizes  that  all  harmony  and  beauty  in  the 
visible  world,  all  symmetry  of  atomic  structure  in  organized 
matter,  all  obedience  to  law  and  constancy  of  action,  result 
from  the  command  of  a Being  possessed  of  infinite  intelligence 
and  power.  Again,  Truth  is  shown  to  us  by  answering  the 
end  for  which  a thing  was  made.  Hence,  accident  or  uncer- 
tainty in  the  result  to  be  reached  is  inconsistent  with  its 
conditions  as  fixed  by  a superintending  governor.  In  any 
scheme  of  intelligent  providence,  every  part  must  have  its 
purpose  and  fulfill  the  mission  assigned  to  it.  For  in  this  way 
it  conforms  to  that  will  which  foresaw  all  the  possibilities  of 
things  before  they  were  created  and  willed  their  arrangement 
and  issue.  The  members  of  this  vast  creation  were  written  in 
the  Divine  book  of  universal  Providence  when  as  yet  there 
was  none  of  them.*  And  when  in  continuance  they  were 
fashioned,  they  grew  up  into  that  wondrous  Cosmos  whose 
parts  are  so  fitted  to  each  other  that  they  have  one  common 
end  in  view,f  and  work,  both  matter  and  mind,  like  soul  and 
body,  together. 

But  while  Truth  is  one  and  indivisible,  save  in  thought,  we 
may  speak  of  physical  and  metaphysical,  or  moral  and  politi- 
cal Truth  ; but  these  are  only  different  names  for  parts  of  one 
and  the  same  thing — that  is,  conformity  of  the  agent  to  the 
creating  and  governing  purpose  of  the  Supreme  will.  There 
can,  therefore,  be  no  conflict  between  these  coordinate  parts 
of  one  idea  which  rests  for  its  authority  upon  the  determina- 
tion of  God.  Yet  we  hear  so  much  said  about  the  conflict 
between  Religion  and  Science  that  many  are  prone  to  think 
they  are  irreconcilable,  and  therefore  the  utterances  of 
one  or  the  other  must  be  false.  And  as  those  facts  which 
appeal  immediately  to  the  senses  offer  a readier  and  simpler 
criterion  of  proof,  it  is  taken  for  granted  that  they  are  true  ; 
while  the  utterances  of  Revelation  which  do  not,  from  the 


*Ps.  cxxxix:  16  (Hebrew).  fCleanthes’  Hymn  to  Zeus,  12-13. 


5H 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


nature  of  the  subject  matter,  submit  to  the  test  of  the  senses,, 
must  be  false  whenever  the  latter  appear  to  be  in  conflict 
with  the  former.  It  is  forgotten  that,  before  we  can  say  there 
is  such  a conflict,  we  must  fully  comprehend  the  testimony  of 
both  these  witnesses.  Without  this  we  may  think  we  have 
convicted  one  or  the  other  of  falsehood,  while  in  reality  we 
have  only  exposed  our  own  ignorance.  Hence,  we  cannot  say 
that  either  is  false  according  to  the  testimony  of  the  other, 
unless  we  master  and  classify  all  the  facts  of  physical  nature, 
and  fathom  the  depths  of  Divine  intelligence.  For,  however 
glaring  a contradiction  there  may  be  apparently  between 
them,  yet  a single  one  of  the  innumerable  facts  which  never 
entered  our  minds  might,  if  known,  resolve  every  difficulty, 
and  show,  instead  of  hopeless  discord,  a most  beautiful  har- 
mony, when  the  coordinate  utterances  of  verbal  and  material 
revelation  are  viewed  in  their  complete  generalization. 
Hence,  we  assert  that  it  is  impossible  for  any  intelligence , short 
of  omniscience , to  convict  Revelation  of  falsehood  by  the  testimony 
of  Nature. 

The  conditions  of  all  knowledge  are  groping  through  the 
darkness  of  ignorance,  and  fighting  errors  of  our  own  creation; 
The  absurdities  of  the  Ptolemaic  system  of  astronomy  sub- 
jected it  to  the  taunt  of  Alphonso,  King  of  Castile  : “ If  this 
be  the  plan  on  which  God  made  the  universe,  had  I been  con- 
sulted I could  have  suggested  a simpler  working  scheme.” 
But  this  false  structure  of  the  cosmical  system  was  really  no 
charge  against  the  true  one.  Men  of  shallow  brains  and  deep 
prejudice  against  religion  said,  in  this  generation,  that  the 
Bible  could  not  be  true  because  it  sanctioned  human  slavery. 
Men  of  still  shallower  brains  endeavored  to  prove  its  lawfulness 
by  appeals  to  the  usages  of  those  who  were  the  channels  through 
which  Revelation  was  delivered  ; as  though  the  truth  could  be 
blamed  with  all  their  personal  failures  in  duty.  Advance 
in  science  and  morals  has  swept  away  both  errors.  We  may 
now  laugh  at  the  mazes  of  the  Ptolemaic  Cycles ; but  we  do 
not  believe  the  truths  of  astronomy  have  been  changed.  \\  e 
rejoice  that  a higher  plane  of  religious  life  enables  all  men  to 
see  that  the  spirit  of  the  gospel  forbids  every  condition  that 
rendered  slavery  possible;  how  much  soever  Moses  may,  for 
the  hardness  of  the  Jewish  heart,  have  suffered  these  things. 
Still  the  Bible  is  no  more  true  and  pure,  now  that  we  are 


i877] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


515" 


able  to  receive  its  doctrines,  than  when  men  charged  God 
foolishly.  Yet  the  bitter  controversy  between  scientists  or 
nature-worshipers  and  those  who  reverence  a spiritual  God,  con- 
tinues unabated.  Both  have  often  erred  through  lack  of 
knowledge,  and  made  themselves  ridiculous  by  assertions 
which  a better  understanding  of  their  respective  subjects  ena- 
bled them  to  disavow.  Each,  for  a time,  thought  that  he  alone 
possessed  all  the  truth.  Many  are  the  bulls  which  Popes  have 
hurled  at  comets  or  other  scientific  meteors  which  crossed 
their  ignorant  horizon.  Theologians  have,  through  a great 
preponderance  of  zeal  over  knowledge,  compromised  their 
cause  by  asserting  that  certain  results  of  scientific  research 
were  false  because  in  conflict  with  the  Bible.  But  the  mis- 
take was  that  they  made  the  Bible  assert  what  it  does  not,  and 
substituting  their  own  interpretations,  have  been  put  to  shame 
because  their  theories  have  been  falsified  by  the  undoubted 
facts  of  science.  Yet  the  persecution  of  Galileo  is  not  due  to 
any  error  or  intolerance  of  revelation,  but  to  a false  interpre- 
tation of  what  it  really  says.  Such  mistakes  have  made  the- 
ologians more  cautious  and  humble — cautious  in  not  jeop- 
ardizing the  cause  of  religion  by  asserting  a conflict  between  it 
and  science  where  there  is  none  ; more  humble,  because  they 
find  that  the  Bible  does  not  reveal  all  its  meaning  at  once, 
but  from  age  to  age,  as  the  world  becomes  prepared  to  receive 
its  teachings.  But  any  number  of  mistakes  of  a similar  sort 
fails  to  teach  scientists  modesty  when  bitten  by  the  rabies  of 
hostility  to  Divine  Revelation.  For  they  are  bent  on  discov- 
ering, not  identity,  but  contrariety  of  teaching  betwen  the  two 
witnesses.  And  as  no  person  ever  desired,  strongly  and  per- 
sistently, to  believe  anything  without  setting  out  to  obtain 
facts  to  sustain  his  pet  idea,  or  else  distort  those  already  known, 
so  as  to  make  them  subservient  to  his  purpose,  such  discrep- 
ancy is  sure  to  be  found.  One  part  of  human  nature  is  en- 
mity against  God ; a fact  undeniable,  whether  we  look  at  the 
world  in  general,  or  interrogate  the  individual  conscience.  The 
revelation  from  heaven  increases  this  enmity  by  exposing  and 
reproving  sin  ; and  so  men  are  bent  on  destroying  the  light 
lest  it  may  disclose  their  hidden  works  of  darkness.  No  other 
theory  will  account  for  the  inveterate  hatred  which  is  exhib- 
ited against  revealed  Truth,  since  it  comes  laden  with  joy  and 
blessings  to  a world  full  of  misery. 


5 16 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


Repeated  failures  in  discovering  the  secrets  of  nature  have 
made  scientists  humbler  in  their  own  sphere,  so  that  when  they 
come  to  an  apparent  contradiction  in  natural  phenomena,  they 
do  not,  for  an  instant,  suppose  this  discrepancy  is  real,  but 
rather  that  it  results  from  their  imperfect  deductions.  Hence, 
they  seek  some  higher  law  by  which  the  seemingly  discordant 
results  can  be  harmonized,  or  struggle  with  patient  experi- 
ment to  discover  whether  nature  will  verify  their  facts.  How- 
ever the  issue  may  be,  they  always  think  the  fault  lies  with 
themselves,  or  arises  from  the  necessary  limitations  of  human 
knowledge.  They  may  well  remember  the  multitude  of  theo- 
ries that  have  been  paraded  before  the  world  in  all  the  pride 
of  confident  ignorance,  yet  had  soon  to  be  buried  out  of  sight 
as  an  untimely  birth.  Each  of  the  sciences  is  the  record  of  a 
struggle  up  through  false  theories,  many  of  them  now  so  ridic- 
ulous that  it  looks  like  a caricature  of  the  human  intellect  to 
believe  they  were  ever  advocated.  These  facts  ought  to  make 
scientists  respectful  in  their  attitude  toward  revealed  religion, 
and  cause  them  for  shame  to  stifle  their  exultation  at  the  pre- 
tended periodical  collapse  of  that  revelation  towhich  the  world 
owes  all  its  liberty  and  material  progress — at  least  until  their 
own  bantlings  cease  “ mewling  and  puking  in  their  nurse’s 
arms.” 

The  greatest  achievements  in  scientific  research  have  been 
made  by  those  who  admitted  no  conflict  with  revealed  Truth. 
The  pioneers  in  every  department  of  investigation  have  been 
those  who  recognized  the  universe  to  be  the  handiwork  of  God, 
and  who  explored  every  part  of  nature  with  the  feeling  of  true 
children  disporting  themselves  in  their  Father’s  house.  His 
revealed  Truth  becomes  more  clear  because  it  is  mirrored  in 
the  material  world.  For  since  the  Divine  countenance  is  vis- 
ible in  all  the  works  of  creation,  and  there  is  but  one  kind  of 
truth,  its  different  parts  testify  to  each  other.  Cleanthes  says, 
in  his  Hymn  to  Zeus,*  “ There  is  but  one  reason  which  per- 
vades all  things,  and  by  which  all  are  governed.”  And  Virgil 
embodies  this  doctrine  when  he  says  : 

“Spiritus  intus  alit;  totamque  infusa  per  artus 
Mens  agitat  molem,  et  magno  se  corpore  miscit.”f 

Common  sense  must  teach  any  unprejudiced  mind  that  if 


Line  20. 


f /En.  VI.,  726-7. 


i877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


517 


Truth  manifests  itself  through  significant  signs,  there  is  every 
reason  to  believe  its  utterances,  though  rational  speech  will  be 
still  more  clear.  If  a Supreme  intelligence  must  precede  to 
establish  order,  this  will  communicate  with  those  possessed  of 
intelligence  by  unmistakeable  utterances.  And  hence,  while 
the  declarations  of  Truth  are  equally  veracious,  however  they 
are  seen  or  heard,  when  the  God  of  Truth  speaks  directly,  his 
voice  must  be  obeyed  first,  because  its  authority  cannot  be 
misunderstood.  Every  candid  mind  must  therefore  believe, 
with  Bacon,  the  revealed  word  of  God,  no  matter  what  contra- 
dicts ; and  rather  consider  his  own  reasonings  at  fault  than  the 
divine  oracles.  The  great  pioneer  in  modern  scientific  re- 
search, and  the  author  of  the  only  method  of  inquiry  recog- 
nized as  valid,  is  pleased  to  say:*  “ Atque  illud  insupee  sup- 
plies rogamus  ne  humana  divinis  officiant ; neve  ex  resera- 
tione  viarum  sensus,  et  accensione  majore  laminis  naturalis, 
aliquid  incredulitatis  et  noctis,  animis  nostris  erga  divina  mys- 
teria  oborietur ; sed  potius,  ut  ab  intellecta  puro  a phantasiis 
et  vanitate  repurgato,  et  divinis  oraculis  nihilominus  subdito 
et  prorsus  dediditio,  fidei  dentur  quae  fidei  sunt.  Postremo,  ut 
scientiae  veneus,  a serpente  infuso  quo  animus  humanus  tu- 
met  et  inflatur,  deposito,  nec  altum  sapiamus,  nec  ultra  soli- 
nem,  sed  veritatem  in  charitate  colamus.”  If  scientists  would 
imitate  this  reverential  spirit  of  their  acknowledged  path- 
finder, we  would  have  no  more  of  the  conflict  between  religion 
and  the  laws  of  nature. 

II.  Truth  is  unchangeable  because  it  is  the  embodiment  of 
the  Divine  attributes. 

A glance  at  the  visible  world  reveals  constant  changes  going 
on  about  us.  These  are  not  confined  to  the  narrow  sphere  of 
our  lives,  where  everything  is  mutable  to  such  a degree  that  our 
mortal  existence  is  compared  to  whatever  is  most  transitory* 
Even  the  solid  earth  undergoes  transformations  from  age  to 
age,  so  that  the  grotesque  fauna  and  gigantic  flora  of  a former 
period  look  as  though  they  belonged  to  an  entirely  different 
world.  The  winds  toss  the  sands  in  deserts  where  once  the 
sea  thundered  against  its  shores.  Portions  of  the  earth’s  sur- 
face have  sunk,  and  the  sites  of  cities  are  covered  by  the 
ocean  ; or  by  the  lake,  where  the  mountains  flowing  down  have 


* Pref.  ad  Instan.  Mag. 


(New  Series,  No.  22.1 


33 


5i8 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


raised  the  level  of  the  waters.  But  the  laws  producing  these 
results  abide  unchanged  amid  all  the  revolutions  they  make, 
for  the  everlasting  God  directs  each  movement.  The  same 
mysterious  vapor  goes  up  to  water  the  earth  now  as  when  cre- 
ation was  but  just  finished.  The  plant  produces  seed  after  its 
kind,  varying  within  specific  limits,  but  constant  to  its  estab- 
lished order  as  the  pendulum  to  its  arc.  The  fish  swims,  the 
bird  flies,  the  ravenous  animal  tears  its  prey,  the  ruminant 
quietly  chews  its  cud.  Man  walks  erect,  and  the  troglodyte 
goes  on  all  fours,  just  as  at  the  first.  All  is  regularity  and  or- 
der. The  same  laws  sway  the  material  world,  and  therefore 
the  phenomena  are  constant.  This  gives  confidence  in  all  the 
offices  of  life.  The  cultivator  of  the  soil  goes  forth  to  his  work 
in  the  full  assurance  that  seed  time  and  harvest  will  never 
fail.  The  investigator  of  Nature’s  secrets  pursues  his  studies 
relying  on  the  same  recurrence  of  phenomena,  without  possibil- 
ity of  failure,  provided  the  like  conditions  be  observed.  On 
any  other  supposition  all  his  efforts  would  be  made  at  random, 
and  new  discoveries  could  not  be  classified,  because  no  one 
could  tell  to  what  department  of  science  they  belonged.  This 
constancy,  however,  is  corroborated  afresh  by  each  new  induc- 
tion, no  matter  where  it  be  made.  For  even  those  physical 
phenomena  which  up  to  our  own  day  were  considered  so  en- 
tirely accidental  that  their  fickleness  passed  into  a proverb, 
have,  when  better  understood,  been  found  to  be  equally  cer- 
tain with  the  rest.  Hence,  the  expression,  “ As  uncertain  as 
the  wind,”  can  no  longer  be  used,  because  the  course  of  the 
wind  and  the  state  of  the  atmosphere  are  now  predicted  with 
nearly  the  same  accuracy  that  other  physical  phenomena  are 
anticipated. 

The  same  fact  may  be  seen  amid  the  varying  and  seemingly 
contradictory  modes  of  mental  action.  It  is  true,  that  when 
we  look  at  a multitude  of  the  conflicting  metaphysical  sys- 
tems, instead  of  presenting  the  clearness  and  constancy  of 
truth,  they  “come  like  shadows,  and  so  depart.”  Many  prob- 
lems which  are  as  old  as  speculative  thought,  and  whose  solu- 
tions have  often  been  claimed  by  self-appointed  leaders,  are 
still  unsolved  ; and  some  of  the  laws  which  regulate  the  men- 
tal processes  are  not  yet  explained  so  clearly  as  to  leave  no 
doubt.  But  the  reason  for  this  is  obvious.  The  facts  are  not 


1877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


519 


sought  first,  and  the  law  educed  by  a patient  and  unbiased 
classification  ; but  the  theory  is  predetermined,  and  then  the 
facts  distorted  to  fit  it.  Yet  despite  this  confusion  of  systems, 
there  are  certain  leading  principles  running  through  all ; and 
speculative  thinkers,  like  scientists,  however  unreasonable  in 
other  respects,  have  never  been  absurd  enough  to  charge  their 
own  mistakes  and  incomplete  deductions  upon  the  unerring 
Truth  after  which  they  were  searching.  Still  the  establishment 
of  law,  the  offer  of  rewards  and  threat  of  punishment,  proceed 
on  the  assumption  that  there  is  constancy  of  mental  action  un- 
der given  circumstances.  All  theories  of  morals,  all  systems 
of  art  and  criteria  of  beauty,  the  canons  of  criticism  and  science 
of  persuasion,  must  rest  upon  such  assumption.  If  the  mind 
of  man  acted  without  any  uniformity,  there  could  be  no  logi- 
cal or  mathematical  formula.  Nay  more,  words  would  convey 
different  significations  to  each  man  ; and  any  common  sign  of 
communication  could  not  be  found.  The  progress  of  know- 
ledge depends  upon  this  certitude  of  mental  action.  Other- 
wise there  could  be  no  acquisition  of  theoretical  knowledge  in 
the  aggregate  of  mankind,  nor  experience  in  the  individual. 
Though  natural  phenomena  were  invariable,  and  the  actions  of 
moral  agents  the  same  under  given  conditions,  yet,  if  the 
modes  by  which  each  man  viewed  them  were  diverse,  there 
could  be  no  matured  experience.  The  individual  would  know 
no  more  in  ripe  age  than  the  child  when  it  first  opened  its  eyes 
upon  the  world.  Hence,  he  would  have  no  legacy  of  collected 
and  verified  information  to  bequeath  to  his  successor  ; and  each 
age  of  the  world  must  remain  equally  ignorant,  because  the 
sport  of  intellectual  uncertainty.  But  because  mental  phenom- 
ena, under  fixed  conditions,  are  invariably  sure,  the  historian 
gives  us  results  which  have  been  arrived  at  after  a careful  re- 
view of  human  conduct  in  the  past,  and  these  serve  as  a lamp 
to  guide  us  in  the  future.  Euclid’s  Geometry  has  remained 
for  more  than  two  thousand  years  as  the  basis  for  mechanical 
mathematics ; and  the  Organon  of  Aristotle  still  supplies  the 
mode  in  which  men  must  reason,  if  they  do  so  correctly. 
Sophocles  forces  our  tears  at  the  miseries  of  the  unfortunate  ; 
Aristophanes  provokes  our  laughter  at  the  absurdities  of  man- 
kind, by  appealing  to  precisely  the  same  feelings  and  present- 
ing the  same  motives  that  Shakespeare  and  Rabelais  did  in 


520 


What  is  Truth  f 


[July, 

their  day.  While  individual  phenomena  of  mind  may  be  un- 
accountable, and  the  actions  of  men  occasionally  abnormal, 
still  there  is  constancy  within  limitations.  Nature  must  have 
room  for  play  in  her  operations,  else  they  cease.  So  meta- 
physical phenomena,  while  subject  to  law,  must  have  freedom 
of  action,  even  more  because  a new  factor,  the  self-determining 
power  of  the  will,  is  necessary  to  its  production.  Even  the 
doctrine  of  chances,  in  its  relations  to  human  conduct,  is  sub- 
ject to  a higher  law  of  certainty  by  which  any  event,  however 
variable  in  its  production,  has  its  inconstancy  confined  within 
fixed  bounds,  and,  therefore,  can  be  predicted  with  perfect 
confidence.  Life,  when  considered  in  the  individual,  is  subject 
to  so  many  fortuitous  circumstances,  that  no  person  can  have 
the  assurance  of  an  hour’s  existence,  yet  in  the  aggregate  of  a 
large  multitude  can  be  predicted  with  mathematical  precision. 
Perhaps  there  is  no  business  which,  if  carried  out  with  perfect 
accuracy  and  integrity,  is  more  sure  to  enrich  than  life  assur- 
ance ; yet  the  duration  of  life  depends  on  an  innumerable  mul- 
titude of  contingencies,  which  mostly  arise  from  each  man’s 
own  course  of  action  in  conforming  to,  or  disagreeing  with, 
the  laws  of  health.  His  action  may  be  good  or  bad,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  voluntary  choice.  And  this  choice  is  swayed 
by  so  many  motives,  apparent,  it  may  be,  but  often  hidden 
even  from  himself,  that  nothing  but  Infinite  wisdom  could 
determine  the  special  result  of  each  act.  Yet  they  are  all 
amenable  to  a governing  principle  which  can  be  discovered. 
And  such  is  the  case  with  all  intellectual  and  moral  ac- 
tions. Were  it  not  so,  we  repeat,  progress  would  be  im- 
possible, and  men  more  helpless  than  the  brute.  For  the 
latter  is  taught  by  instinct,  and  so  contains  within  itself 
all  the  knowledge  necessary  to  enable  it  to  fulfill  its  destiny — 
blindly,  it  is  true,  to  itself,  but  still  certainly.  Men,  however, 
having  no  guide  but  reason,  and  this  having  no  fixed  data 
from  which  to  draw  inferences,  each  would  be  made  subject  to 
every  chance,  and  perish  because  he  could  never  accumulate 
knowledge. 

This  conformity  to  the  will  of  God  is  evidently  complete  in 
all  his  works  save  in  human  volition.  Here,  however,  is  an 
element  of  disorder,  which  cannot  be  accounted  for  save  on  the 
principle  that  man  can  act  in  opposition  to  his  Maker’s  com- 


1877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


521 


mandment.  This  freedom  is  a primary  truth,  incapable  of  ex- 
planation, yet  necessary  to  be  assumed  unless  the  distinctions 
between  right  and  wrong  be  obliterated.  The  presence  of  sin 
in  a world  created  and  governed  by  a holy  God  is  also  unac- 
countable, but  yet  testified  to  by  consciousness,  our  highest 
appeal.  Indeed,  this  truth,  and  the  assurance  that  our  guilt 
arises  from  our  own  wrong-doing,  is  certified  to  as  emphatically 
by  the  individual  consciousness  as  by  direct  revelation.  It 
introduces  a new  element  in  the  calculation  of  human  motive, 
but  no  uncertainty  in  the  result.  For  while  this  manifests 
lack  of  conformity  to  the  Divine  will,  the  discord  is  confined 
within  determinate  limits.  Pharaoh  acted  as  freely,  as  wick- 
edly, when,  deaf  to  oft-repeated  warnings,  and  while  he  saw 
more  than  the  sword  of  Damocles  hanging  over  his  head,  he 
persisted  in  opposition  to  the  command  of  God.  Still  for  this 
very  cause  was  he  raised  up,  that  he  might  exhibit  the  power 
and  glory  of  the  Divine  government  in  the  punishment  of 
wicked  men.  The  obdurate  Jews  acted  freely  in  putting  to 
death  a man  declared  to  be  innocent  after  the  most  searching 
examination  which  stern  Roman  law  could  enforce.  Yet  this 
was  effected  by  the  determinate  counsel  and  foreknowledge  of 
God.  The  hot  passions  of  men  rage  in  fury  like  the  waves 
of  the  sea.  But  it  is  written  of  both  : Thus  far  shalt  thou  go, 
and  no  farther.  Both  in  the  moral  and  physical  world,  the  in- 
fluences act  either  separately  or  in  combination  to  produce  the 
determinate  result.  The  heathen  poet  saw  this  when  he  said  : 
“ The  counsel  of  Jove  was  fulfilled  all  the  time.”*  God  com- 
missions his  prophet  to  declare  : “ My  counsel  shall  stand,  and 
I will  do  all  my  pleasure.”  f Hence,  each  particle  of  matter, 
each  natural  force,  each  voluntary  action,  is  subjected  to  this 
all-controlling  principle,  and  is  perfectly  obedient  to  its  mis- 
sion. Were  it  not  so,  everything  would  fall  into  confusion. 
For  if  one  portion  of  this  world  could  act  contrary  to  its  duty, 
then  each  other  part,  being  connected  with  it,  must  be  influ- 
enced by  its  error.  A mistake  of  a single  figure  in  the  largest 
calculation  vitiates  all  the  process  subsequent  to  its  occurrence. 
The  smallest  wheel  in  a complicated  machinery  can  mar  the 
action  of  the  whole.  Hence,  failure  in  the  least  of  Nature’s 
processes  leads  to  failure  in  all.  But  since  every  part  alike  is 


* Iliad,  I.,  5.  rhoS  6'  treAeiero  ftovXr}~ 


f Is.  xlv  : 10. 


522 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


impressed  with  this  conformity  to  the  Divine  will,  and  accom- 
plishes the  end  for  which  it  was  created,  the  whole  moves  on 
from  age  to  age  in  perfect  harmony.  No  confusion  mars  the 
perfect  movement ; no  flaw  in  the  mechanism  causes  a stop ; 
but  the  universe  marks  out  its  unending  years  on  the  dial  of 
time. 

III. — This  truth  is  capable  of  demonstration  in  exact  pro- 
portion as  we  come  into  harmony  with  it  and  it  falls  within  our 
range  of  possible  vision.  Much  is  said  about  the  clearness  of 
proof  which  some  of  the  sciences  afford.  Their  methods  of 
demonstration  are  lauded  as  though  they  cannot  lead  astray; 
and  are  themselves  attractive  since  they  give  the  student  a 
tangible  reward  for  his  labor.  The  mathematical  sciences,  as 
they  deal  with  abstract  number  and  discrete  quantity,  are  sup- 
posed to  yield  a sort  of  proof  unique  in  kind,  and  possessed  of 
a certainty  which  belongs  to  no  others  to  the  same  degree. 

Next  to  these,  those  sciences  which  deal  with  matter  di- 
rectly, which  can  therefore  be  subjected  to  sensible  tests,  offer 
almost  or  quite  equal  certainty.  Their  certitude  is  often  con- 
trasted with  the  working  in  other  departments  of  knowledge, 
especially  with  those  which  employ  metaphysical  or  moral 
reasoning.  The  one  kind  is  claimed  to  offer  infallible  demon 
stration  ; the  other  probable,  or,  from  the  nature  of  the  sub- 
jects about  which  it  is  conversant,  moral  proof.  And  this  is 
said  to  range  all  the  way  from  possibility  to  moral  certainty. 

What  this  may  mean,  it  is  the  business  of  those  who  use  the 
terms  to  explain.  One  thing,  however,  is  beyond,  question  : that 
the  certitude  in  the  one  case  or  the  doubtfulness  in  the  other  does 
notarise  from  the  nature  of  the  objects  investigated,  but  from 
the  methods  of  inquiry  or  the  persons  who  institute  them.* 
For  when  we  examine  closely  we  see  that  the  accuracy  of  re- 
sults in  geometry,  for  example,  arise  from  the  character  of  the 
terms  used  and  the  data  agreed  upon.  There  is  no  reason,  in 
the  nature  of  the  thing,  why  a definition  should  not  be  as  clear 
touching  one  department  of  knowledge  as  another.  For  unless 
Truth  lies  at  the  basis  of  each  of  them,  it  is  impossible  that  the 


* Aristol.  Met.  993,  Bekk.  Ovk  ev  roi5  npaypadiv,  aAA’  ev  ijulv  to 
ai'riov  k6ziv  avzt /?.  fiti/tep  ydp  nod  r a r <av  vvxr EpiSaiv  uitpaza  TtpoS 
to  cpeyyoS  e'xei  ro  keB'  r/iiepav,  ovzoo  xai  zijs  ipuzipciS  ipvxpS  6 rovS 
npoi  za  zijj  (pccv spcdzaza  ndvioov. 


I877-J 


What  is  Truth  ? 


523 


responses  given  to  such  as  investigate  them  should  be  wor- 
thy of  acceptation.  For,  however  clear  the  method  and  cogent 
the  application,  the  answer  can  be  no  more  true  than  the  sub- 
ject which  furnishes  it;  as  the  stream  can  never  rise  higher 
than  the  fountain.  Each  science,  then,  rests  ultimately  on  the 
Divine  will  as  manifested  in  the  nature  of  its  subject  matter. 

In  those  cases  where  infallible  responses  have  been  given,  if 
any  there  be,  the  reason  is  that  the  conditions  under  which 
Nature  submits  herself  to  be  questioned  have  been  complied 
with  implicitly.  For  God  speaks  distinctly,  in  his  works  and 
in  his  word,  to  those  who  are  willing  to  ask  aright.  Seek  and 
ye  shall  find  ; knock  and  it  shall  be  opened  unto  you,  is  writ- 
ten over  every  door  of  knowledge  fit  for  the  use  of  men.  But 
in  no  other  way  can  an  answer  be  expected.  Had  Pythagoras 
entertained  some  conceit  as  to  the  relation  between  the  square 
of  the  longest  side  of  a right  angled  triangle  to  the  sum  of  the 
squares  of  the  other  two  sides,  he  would  never  have  completed 
the  demonstration.  But  by  using  adequate  terms  always  in 
the  same  sense,  and  divesting  them  of  all  irrelevant  meaning,  he 
arrived  after  the  result  which  was  true  to  Nature.  Had  he  pur- 
sued any  other  course,  the  truth  of  the  proposition,  though 
not  attained  by  him,  would  still  have  existed  in  Nature  all  the 
same,  awaiting  some  discoverer  who  would  seek  according  to  the 
conditions  of  geometry.  The  whole  body  of  scientific  truth,  as 
now  known,  and  all  that  lies  in  the  fertile  womb  of  the  future, 
existed  in  esse  in  the  beginning  of  time  ; and  only  awaited  com- 
pliance with  the  proper  laws  of  investigation  suited  to  each 
case,  to  be  in  posse  for  the  good  of  the  world.  Those  in  the 
pursuit  of  truth  have  often  had  an  inward  assurance  that  they 
had  arrived  near  where  their  prize  lay  concealed,  yet  failed  to 
reach  it.  This  fact  is  seen  in  any  of  those  sciences  which  are 
thought  to  yield  the  most  satisfactory  proof.  In  the  application 
of  geometry  to  the  measurement  of  angles,  heights,  or  distances, 
the  approach  to  perfect  accuracy  is  indicated  precisely  by  the 
degree  of  compliance  with  the  conditions  imposed  by  Nature. 

A near  approximation  is  obtained,  so  that  we  may  confi- 
dently say,  the  sum  is  greater  than  A and  less  than  B.  Mount 
Everest  is  more  than  28,000  and  less  than  30,000  ft.  high.  Is 
there  any  uncertainty  about  its  height  in  reality?  No  sane  man 
can  think  this  ; and  when  by  instruments  of  greater  accu- 


524 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July> 


racy,  and  through  the  use  of  methods  more  precise  the  altitude 
is  established  for  all  practical  purposes,  it  is  still  not  absolutely 
correct.  This  process  is  like  the  asymptotes,  where  there  is  a per- 
petual approach  of  the  two  lines  without  ever  meeting.  Still  it 
is  all  the  time  plain  that  the  facts  in  the  case  are  not  changed 
by  our  ignorance  or  knowledge.  Take  an  example  more  nearly 
concerning  practical  life.  Let  it  be  proposed  to  establish  the 
latitude  or  longitude  of  a given  place.  It  is  determined  approx- 
imately, so  that  geodesy  can  fix  upon  one  point  in  a certain  lo- 
cality, and  another  at  a short  distance  from  the  first,  and  assert 
with  full  assurance  that  the  desired  meridian  is  between  them, 
without  being. able,  however,  to  say  precisely  where.  By  a bet- 
ter compass  and  more  accurate  trigonometrical  calculations, 
the  point  may  possibly  be  found  and  the  absolute  meridian 
is  fixed.  So,  in  the  early  survey  of  a territory,  the  lines  may 
not.  either  through  haste  in  the  survey,  or  employment 
of  unskillful  men,  be  correctly  laid  off,  and  prove  fruitful 
sources  of  dispute  between  contiguous  owners.  A strip  of  land 
may  be  in  litigation,  while  each  proprietor  willingly  admits  that 
his  neighbor  rightfully  possesses  the  greater  part  of  what  is 
considered  his  estate.  The  boundary  is  somewhere  between 
the  two  lines  claimed  by  the  respective  parties.  The  point  is 
to  determine  where,  so  that  the  true  amount  of  land  may  be 
adjudged  to  each.  In  all  thest  cases  the  matter  in  dispute  is 
not  uncertain  in  itself,  and  is  made  plain  provided  the  proper 
appliances  be  employed  for  determining  the  facts. 

It  may  be  said  that  these  are  examples  taken  from  concrete 
mathematics,  and  that  the  uncertainty  of  the  result  arises  from 
the  elements  of  imperfection  introduced  by  instruments  or  their 
manual  application.  But  the  like  failures  to  obtain  absolute  ac- 
curacy is  shown  when  the  calculations  are  made  from  numeri- 
cal data.  For  in  the  integral  calculus  there  are  multitudes 
of  cases  where  more  than  one  answer  will  satisfy  the  require- 
ments of  the  problem.  Many  equations  again  are  interminate; 
and  there  is  as  much  room  for  ingenuity  in  fencing  with  the  cabal- 
istic signs  of  quaternions  as  there  was  with  Barbara.  Celarent, 
etc.  of  the  schoolmen.  Besides,  pure  mathematics,  like  every 
subject  of  investigation  whose  terms  are,  ex  necessitate,  postu- 
lates, must,  as  an  independent  science  without  applications,  be 
a nullity.  For,  if  you  dissever  numbers  from  objects,  you  di- 


1877.] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


525 


vest  them  of  their  significance,  and  they  become  purely 
arbitrary  signs.  They  can  be  made  to  signify  anything  at  the 
caprice  of  him  who  employs  them  ; and  consequently  they 
carry  with  them  no  more  certitude  than  words  dissociated  from 
ideas.  For  a term,  whether  it  be  angle,  number  or  logical 
postulate,  becomes  a variable  when  applied  to  any  concrete 
quantity,  and  ceases  to  be  a factor  in  demonstrative  reasoning, 
in  the  strict  application  of  that  term.  While  in  the  region  of 
pure  abstractions,  the  results  deduced  from  them  may  be  ever 
so  true,  they  are  meaningless  to  us,  and  therefore  of  no  practical 
value. 

The  claim  that  moral  truths  can  be  established  with  un- 
doubted certitude  by  a process  of  demonstration,  even  as  the 
facts  of  material  science,  has  been  scouted  as  chimerical.  The 
few  who  have  attempted  the  purely  scientific  method  in  met- 
aphysics or  morals,  have  been  derided  as  on  a par  with  those 
who  sought  the  philosopher’s  stone — mere  visionaries,  who  pur- 
sued an  ignus  fatus.  The  comparative  ease  of  demonstration 
in  physics,  the  extreme  difficulty  of  reasoning  in  morals,  being 
assumed,  have  given  speciousness  to  the  notion  that  the  dif- 
ference between  the  processes  in  these  two  subjects  results  either 
from  a necessary  diversity  in  the  methods  employed,  or  the  facts 
lying  at  the  basis  of  the  inquiries.  Let  it  be  granted  however, 
that  there  is  truth  in  spiritual  things,  and  that  the  phenomena 
of  mind  range  themselves  under  laws;  then,  assuredly,  if  the 
proper  methods  of  investigation  be  adopted  and  pursued  with 
sufficient  patience,  vigor,  and  energy,  these  laws  may  be — nay 
must  be — disclosed  with  as  much  certainty  as  those  concerning 
any  other  class  of  subjects.  Let  the  true  issue  be  kept  clearly 
in  view.  If  it  be  asserted  that  there  is  no  Truth,  or  that  it  is 
unknown  to  us  as  Democritus  held,*  then  there  can  be  no 
controversy.  For  what  does  not  exist  or  is  not  knowable,  of 
course  cannot  be  discovered.  But  if  it  exists,  then,  wherever  it 
leaves  vestiges  of  its  presence,  there  it  can  be  traced  while 
these  are  kept  in  view.  And  if  as  Goethe  says,  f“there  be  in  man 
a desire  for  Truth,  and  aptitude  for  discerning  it  when  found,”' 

* As  quoted  by  Aristotle,  Met.  1009,  Bekk,  ?/r 01  ovSev  t ivcn  dXjjOii  r/  r/Uiv 
adr/^-OY. 

t Wahrheitsliebe  zeigt  sich  darin,  dass  man  liberal]  das  Gute  zu  finden  und  zu 
schatzen  weiss. 


526 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July, 


then  a pursuit  which  looks  steadfastly  upon  its  vestiges  with- 
out being  turned  aside  by  individual  bias,  must  end  in  its  dis- 
covery. f or  whether  the  T ruth  be  called  by  this  or  that  name  is 
immaterial,  provided  the  mind  has  an  appetency  for  it.  In  con- 
sidering the  dual  nature  of  man,  if  we  assume,  as  is  rational, 
that  provision  is  made  for  both  parts  in  proportion  to  their 
wants,  we  must  admit  that  moral  truth  fills  a larger  sphere  in 
his  requirements  than  physical.  For  the  chief  difference  which 
■discloses  itself  at  first  sight  between  man  aftd  the  lower  ani- 
mals is  that  the  former  have  spiritual  powers  in  predominance, 
while  the  latter  are  nearly  all  corporeal.  If  pabulum  be  fur- 
nished according  to  the  need  of  each  part  of  man,  the  sum  of 
spiritual  truth  must  greatly  exceed  physical.  Why,  then, 
should  it  not  be  as  easily  attainable?  The  reason  is,  that  men’s 
minds  are  darkened  by  error,  their  opinions  colored  by  preju- 
dice ; and  so  choose  falsehood  because  it  is  in  harmony  with 
their  nature.  In  pure  science  the  result  is  a matter  of  perfect 
indifference.  The  powers  of  numbers  take  no  hold  upon  the 
passions  of  men.  It  matters  nothing  to  our  inclinations  whether 
two  angles  be  equal  to  each  other  or  not.  The  composition 
of  water  appealed  to  no  man’s  predilections  so  as  to  sway  his 
judgment  in  the  analysis.  Hence  there  is  no  trouble  from 
this  source  in  defining  terms  and  fixing  a nomenclature  of  sci- 
ence which  shall  be  invariable.  And  when  this  is  done,  the 
reasoning  process  will  bring  the  conclusion  with  equal  pre- 
cision everywhere.  But  the  diversity  lies  in  settling  upon  the 
data  employed.  These  pass  out  of  the  sphere  of  indifference 
where  pure  abstractions  remain,  and  come  under  the  influence 
of  our  feelings,  our  prejudices,  or  our  desires.  Each  man, 
then,  defining  an  idea  according  to  his  subjective  condition, 
even  when  he  hears  the  same  word  that  another  does,  may 
not  think  of  precisely  the  same  thing.  So  the  quantities  em- 
ployed in  the  metaphysical  calculation  being  different,  the  an- 
swers must  be  diverse.  Yet  in  each  case  there  is  an  approxi- 
mation to  agreement,  else  men  could  not  understand  each 
other.  If  vocal  sounds  and  written  characters  had  not  some- 
thing more  than  casual  agreement,  there  could  be  no  such  thing 
as  communication  between  man  and  man.  Babel  would  be 
enacted  all  the  time.  Language  grows  out  of  the  roots  of 
mutual  understanding  by  symbols,  and  is  the  concrete  expres- 


1877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


527 


sion  of  identity  in  thought.  Its  laws  are  as  certain  as  those  of  the 
anatomical  structure  of  the  body.  The  fragmentary  roots  of  lan- 
guages, whose  peoples  have  long  since  been  buried  with  them, 
when  accidentally  exhumed  by  the  comparative  grammarian, 
enable  him  to  reconstruct  the  framework  of  the  ancient  speech; 
even  as  the  single  bone  in  Cuvier’s  hands  would  be  sufficient 
for  him  to  build  again  the  skeleton  of  the  animal  which  had 
perished  from  the  earth. 

This  partial  agreement  in  the  use  of  words  shows  that  there 
is  identity  at  the  bottom  after  which  all  are  striving;  and  the 
approximation  will  be  proportionate  in  every  case  to  the  clear- 
ness of  each  man’s  idea  and  his  freedom  from  prejudice.  Given 
two  shades  of  meaning,  one  of  which  conveys  less  than  the  re- 
ality, and  the  other  more  ; then  the  Truth  must  be  somewhere 
between  them,  as  surely  as  the  proper  line  is  between  the  dis- 
puted boundaries  of  two  proprietors,  or  the  different  determina- 
tions of  the  meridian  in  geodesy.  If  the  mind  could  be  cleared 
sufficiently  from  individual  bias  to  give  each  term  its  exact 
meaning,  every  man  who  is  equally  free  from  prejudice  would 
accept  this  term  as  an  adequate  expression  of  an  idea  under- 
stood between  them.  If,  next,  a vocabulary  were  invented  for 
each  special  department  of  reasoning  with  fixed  meanings,  like 
the  nomenclature  of  chemistry  or  botany,  the  logical  process 
employing  these  terms  must  deduce  as  trustworthy  responses 
as  geometry.  While  demonstration  in  mental  phenomena  is 
more  difficult  to  most  persons  than  in  material,  yet  this  arises, 
as  we  have  seen,  not  from  the  inherent  obstacles  of  the  sub- 
ject, but  from  those  thrown  around  it  by  our  methods.  Besides, 
when  we  look  at  the  subject  with  candor,  we  see  that  there  are 
many  truths  in  mental  and  moral  action  quite  as  well  estab- 
lished as  any  facts  in  physics.  Certain  acts  are  pronounced 
good  or  bad,  according  to  some  inherent  quality,  by  every  per- 
son possessing  a given  amount  of  moral  training,  with  as  much 
confidence  as  the  mind  passes  judgment  on  any  facts  in  na- 
ture. That  it  is  wicked  to  remove  landmarks  ; that  it  is  inhuman 
to  oppress  the  orphan,  to  rob  the  widow,  to  withhold  the 
wages  of  the  hireling,  were  facts  as  clear  to  the  mind  of  Job  as 
that  the  Pleiades  always  rose  in  their  season,  or  that  silver  ore 
was  found  in  its  proper  veins.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  it 
is  sinful  to  lie  and  steal ; for  parents  to  abandon  their  infant 


528 


What  is  Truth  ? 


July, 

children;  to  injure  the  helpless  or  abuse  those  who  have  not 
provoked  us.  If  we  look  about  us  we  will  discover  an  im 
mense  stock  of  moral  truths  attested  by  everybody  of  given 
intelligence  and  culture,  and  which  are  no  more  likely  to  be 
disputed  than  the  postulates  of  science.  Conventional  regula- 
tions may  declare  certain  acts  to  be  right  on  the  other  side  of 
the  Alps  which  are  held  wrong  on  this  side ; but  such  enact- 
ments do  not  affect  our  consciousness  of  immutable  morality  ; 
and,  of  course,  do  not  change  the  nature  of  the  acts  themselves. 
Besides,  the  first  truths  in  one  department  of  knowledge  rest 
on  precisely  the  same  basis  as  those  of  another.  They  are 
self-evident  facts  which  are  accepted  as  soon  as  they  are  pre- 
sented to  that  mind  which  is  capable  of  taking  in  their  full 
meaning.  It  is  vain  to  say  that  many,  perhaps  all,  these  fun- 
damental truths  in  morals  have  been  disputed  in  some  age  or 
nation,  and  that  there  is  no  agreement  now  among  men  as  to 
the  exact  number  of  these  which  are  to  be  accepted.  For  the 
same  objection  could  be  as  legitimately  urged  against  the  first 
truths  in  physics,  provided  the  words  be  employed  in  the  same 
sense  in  both  departments  of  speculation.  For  we  must  bear 
in  mind  that  first  truths  depend  for  their  reception  on  a given 
amount  of  intelligence.  As  soon  as  a man  has  a full  comprehen- 
sion of  the  terms  employed,  he  accepts  as  true,  beyond  dispute, 
that  the  whole  is  greater  than  any  one  of  its  parts  ; that  two 
things  which  are  equal  to  one  and  the  same  third  are  equal  to 
each  other ; or  that  two  plus  two  are  four.  But  there  was  a 
time  in  the  history  of  many  nations,  just  as  in  the  life  of  the 
individual,  when  these  facts  could  not  be  considered  first  truths 
or  necessary  conditions  of  thought,  because  they  were  not 
comprehended.  The  decimal  notation  clearly  points  to  a 
period  when  no  person  using  it  could  reckon  beyond  the  num- 
ber of  his  fingers.  For  him  all  the  superstructure  of  concrete 
arithmetic  had  no  meaning  ; while  the  abstract  number,  in  its 
most  elementary  conceptions,  never  entered  into  his  thoughts. 
Not  one  of  the  axioms  of  geometry  could  be  accepted  by  him 
as  a primary  truth,  for  his  mind  was  not  sufficiently  advanced 
for  its  comprehension,  and  nothing  can  be  accepted  as  such 
unless  it  present  itself  under  the  two  conditions — full  under- 
standing, and  the  immediately  consequent  assurance  of  its 
verity.  When  the  moral  perceptions  are  blunted  by  continu- 


1 877-1 


What  is  Truth  ? 


529 

ance  in  sin,  or  where  they  have  never  been  educated  up  to  any 
standard  of  intelligent  virtue,  its  most  rudimentary  notions 
might  be  denied  or  questioned.  And  this  might  be  done  by 
persons  of  the  highest  intellectual  culture,  as  in  the  case  of  Rous- 
seau, Macchiavelli,  and  the  most  refined  voluptuaries  among 
the  later  Romans,  or  such  as  are  sunk  in  the  lowest  depths 
of  barbarism.  The  conscience  which  is  dead  cannot  perceive 
first  truths  in  morals  ; the  intellect  utterly  uncultivated  fails  to 
discern,  and  therefore  may  deny  as  well  as  affirm,  the  axioms  of 
science  indifferently.  No  legitimate  argument  in  proof  of  a 
radical  difference  between  the  clearness  of  scientific  and  moral 
truth  can  therefore  be  drawn  from  the  nature  of  their  respective 
first  truths,  or  the  treatment  they  have  received  among  men. 

There  is  no  subject  in  speculation  about  which  we  hear  more 
ioose  talk  than  this  of  first  truths.  It  is  impossible  to  fix  an 
infallible  criterion  for  their  determination,  because  they  differ 
in  number  according  to  the  natural  capacity  or  special  culture 
of  the  individual.  Euclid’s  Geometry  contains  no  truth,  first 
or  of  any  order,  to  the  majority  of  mankind.  But  when  this 
book,  after  being  carefully  withheld  for  along  time  by  Paschal’s 
father,  accidentally  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  wonderful  twelve- 
year-old  boy,  the  young  genius  turned  over  page  after  page, 
from  the  first  to  the  last,  with  the  remark,  “All  this  is  plain !” 
So  to  Mrs.  Somerville,  whose  friends  wished  to  preserve  her 
girlhood  unharmed  by  such  dangerous  things  as  Algebra,  when 
the  forbidden  work  was  obtained  by  stealth,  it  was  all  first 
truths,  because  it  found  a capacity  just  suited  to  its  acceptance. 
It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  first  truths  depend  on  culture ; as 
we  may  see  illustrated  continually  in  young  children,  or  persons 
at  any  age  who  are  mastering  a particular  branch  of  knowledge. 
As  they  rise  to  a higher  level,  new  facts  present  themselves 
under  such  conditions  that  they  are  at  once  understood  and 
accepted.  The  mind  then  appropriates  them  as  ideas  so  clear 
that  they  need  no  proof ; nay,  rather  their  proof  is  involved  in 
the  general  growth  of  the  mind,  for  they  are  as  evident  and  as 
true  to  it  as  the  consciousness  of  its  own  actions.  This  is  the 
method  of  advancement  in  culture  ; and  first  truths  multiply 
in  exact  proportion  to  the  expansion  of  the  mind,  and  the 
strength  which  experience  gives  it  through  the  sloughing  off 
of  old  errors.  Like  the  change  of  night  into  day  in  the  mate- 


530 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July 


rial  world.  At  first  all  is  darkness,  and  nothing  is  seen.  There 
is  no  knowledge ; because  while  there  are  objects  innumerable 
close  by,  and  the  sense  of  sight  is  present  and  vigorous,  there 
is  no  medium  through  which  they  can  be  discerned.  The  be- 
nighted traveler  is  lost,  and  gropes  around  in  vain  to  find, 
where  he  is.  He  may  feel  something  touching  him  ; but  even 
this  he  cannot  recognize.  Yet,  as  the  few  faint  rays  of  light 
reveal  the  outlines,  he  sees  the  distorted  shapes,  but  cannot 
comprehend  anything  around  him.  Gradually,  however,  the 
eye  of  day  opens,  and  his  intelligence  expands  with  the  in- 
creasing light.  He  determines  the  larger  objects  with  accu- 
racy, and  traces  the  more  minute.  And  when  the  full  flood  of 
light  is  spread  by  the  risen  sun,  all  is  so  clear  that  he  takes  in 
at  a glance  the  entire  panorama  which  was  around  him  before, 
but  of  which  he  had  no  conception.  This  capacity  for  first 
truths  is  not  confined  to  any  one  department  of  knowledge, 
and  is  everywhere  amenable  to  precisely  the  same  laws  of 
growth.  It  must,  however,  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the  growth 
will  be  in  the  department  in  which  the  knowledge  is  gained. 
Hence  the  culture  of  pure  intellect  will  not  necessarily  enable 
the  moral  sense  to  gain  new  truths ; neither  will  the  develop- 
ment of  this  attribute  insure  mastery  by  the  reasoning  power. 
These  may,  and  often  do,  act  and  react  on  each  other  ; but 
they  may  also  be  cultivated  in  isolation,  or  at  one  another’s 
expense.  But  in  precisely  the  degree  that  they  are  respect- 
ively cultured  will  be  their  capacity  in  their  several  spheres  to 
receive  new  truths,  and  these  in  time  become  primary  and 
fundamental  to  further  growth.  It  may  be  asked,  What,  then, 
constitutes  a first  truth,  and  wherein  does  this  differ  from  oth- 
er information  clearly  apprehended  by  the  mind  ? As  soon  as 
an  idea  becomes  so  clear  that  it  is  spontaneously  accepted,  and 
requires  no  explanation  or  proof — nay,  rather,  is  obscured 
thereby — it  is  a first  truth  to  that  order  of  capacity  and  culture 
which  so  receives  it.  And  those  conceptions  which  so  com- 
mend themselves  to  the  universal  acceptation  of  cultured  peo- 
ple, are,  by  common  consent,  classified  by  themselves.  But 
it  is  evident  that  their  subjective  nature,  as  well  as  their  num- 
ber, is  regulated  by  a sliding  scale.  For  if  the  power  of  the 
mind  were  greatly  enlarged,  not  only  would  their  number  be 
increased,  but  their  clearness  also.  And  even  the  most  funda- 


1 877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


53* 


mental  and  primary  of  them  all,  while  incapable  of  explana- 
tion in  terms,  may  still  be  elucidated  by  concrete  examples. 
And  hererein  was  the  power  of  Jesus  Christ  as  a teacher  pre- 
eminent above  all  others,  by  raising  from  the  dead  and  reha- 
bilitating the  ideas  of  virtue,  which  before  were  thoroughly 
comprehended  and  possessed  by  all,  but  had  lost  their  vital 
power.  This  he  did  constantly,  illustrating  abstract  truth  by 
parables,  and  actualizing  it  in  his  life. 

It  is  further  claimed  that  there  must  be  a radical  difference 
in  the  nature  of  proof  which  the  moral  and  physical  sciences 
furnish,  because  of  the  opposite  fortunes  which  they  exhibit. 
It  is  said  that  not  only  the  first  principles  of  scientific  truth 
are  unquestioned,  but  .that  a grand  system  of  matured  results 
have  for  ages  defied  doubt  ; while,  on  the  other  hand,  all 
questions  of  moral  and  intellectual  philosophy  are  still  open 
and  subject  to  frequent  controversy.  It  is  astonishing  to  hear 
it  maintained  that  the  first  principles  of  science  are  so  well 
settled  and  clear  that  there  can  be  no  question  about  them, 
when  this  assertion  is  in  the  face  of  undoubted  history.  For 
example:  The  constituents  of  many  metals  which  have  been 
long  known  are  each,  sui generis,  and  have  the  same  structure, 
hardness,  weight,  and  other  properties.  They  can  be  mixed, 
separated,  changed  in  form,  but  the  identity  of  each  ultimate 
particle  remains  the  same  in  all  these  mutations.  It  was  con- 
ceded that  no  one  of  these  substances  could  be  made  without 
uniting  their  constituent  parts  in  their  due  proportions.  Yet, 
in  defiance  of  all  established  laws  of  chemistry,  the  foremost 
scientific  men  of  the  middle  ages,  and  almost  to  our  own  time, 
wearied  themselves  in  the  fruitless  search  after  some  substance, 
which,  by  its  mere  touch,  would  transmute  the  base  metals, 
into  gold.  So  again  : No  physical  truth  seems  more  obvious 
than  that  no  power  can  be  generated  by  the  multiplica- 
tion of  machinery,  and  that  action  and  reaction  are  equal. 
But  the  world  still  abounds  in  visionaries,  the  lineal  descend- 
ants of  those  who  gave  their  lives  to  the  attempt  to  invent 
perpetual  motion.  It  is  further  accepted  as  a fundamental 
maxim  that,  ex  nihilo  nihil  fit,  or  that  every  effect  must  have 
an  adequate  cause.  But,  to  escape  from  the  necessity  of 
admitting  a Creator,  such  as  common  sense,  as  well  as  revela- 
tion, declares  to  be  a necessary  condition  of  the  existence  of  a 


532 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July> 


world,  this  axiom  is  quietly  ignored  or  sneered  at  as  absurd. 
Scientific  men  will  reason  with  perfect  clearness  and  cogency, 
proceeding  upon  the  principle  of  causation  up  to  a certain 
point,  and  then,  because  they  cannot  trace  it  iny  further  with- 
out admitting  a personal  Creator  as  an  indispensable  factor,  will 
stop  short  and  say  that  the  world  created  itself ; that  the  law 
of  development  first  enacted  and  next  executed  itself.  True, 
we  are  left  in  doubt  as  to  the  method.  And  equally  in  the 
face  of  experience — an  experience  as  certain  and  satisfactory 
as  demonstration  can  be — it  is  asserted  that  mind  cannot 
influence  the  action  of  matter,  or  that  there  cannot  be  a physi- 
cal effect  without  a physical  cause  ; that  my  will  does  not 
determine  whether  my  pen  write  this  word  rather  than  that. 
In  this  way,  to  carry  out  a favorite  theory,  the  plainest  and 
most  common  facts  of  consciousness  are  belied,  and  skeptics 
forsake  all  consistency  in  a futile  attempt  to  show  that  Revela- 
tion is  a myth. 

It  is  indisputable  that  men  can  attain  scientific  truth  in  no 
other  way  than  by  putting  themselves  cn  rapport  with  the  pro- 
cesses of  nature.  Conformably  to  this  process,  those  modes  of 
action  by  which  the  natural  world  accomplishes  its  work  are 
discovered  through  the  generalization  of  a great  number  of 
facts  by  observation  and  experiment.  They  are  called  laws, 
because  they  are,  to  the  extent  we  comprehend  physical  phe- 
nomena, the  methods  by  which  the  world  is  governed  accord- 
ing to  the  notions  of  a Theist,  or  governs  itself  in  the  view  of 
the  naturalist.  But,  in  either  case,  these  laws  mean  nothing 
more  than  the  mode  by  which  the  world  is  controlled  ; and  are 
more  or  less  adequate  expressions  for  this  government  in  the 
proportion  that  men,  by  submitting  their  intellectual  powers  to 
the  course  of  nature,  come  into  harmony  with  its  motions.  So 
the  laws  of  thought,  whether  framed  in  logic  or  pure  math- 
ematics, signify  no  more  than  the  mastery'  which  the  mind 
gets  over  its  own  processes,  by  submitting  to  the  necessary 
conditions  of  thought  as  applied  to  itself,  or  to  numbers  in 
their  abstract  relations.  In  moral  ideas  the  case  is  the  same. 
Whence  arise  the  notions  of  Civil  Law  or  of  the  government  of 
men  in  their  social  relations?  It  is  not,  certainly,  a matter  of 
chance  or  indifference  that  some  things  are  deemed  virtuous 
and  others  vicious ; and,  as  a consequence,  the  former  de- 


1877-] 


What  is  Truth  ? 


533 


serve  protection  and  encouragement,  while  the  latter  call  for 
repression.  If  we  consider  law  as  the  expression  of  the  moral 
sense  touching  what  is  required  between  man  and  man,  we 
can  discern  that  this  ariseswspontaneously  from  sympathy  with 
those  relations  which  the  Creator  established  between  himself 
and  his  creatures.  Hence,  that  greatest  of  all  discoveries,  the 
discovery  of  law,  is  nothing  else,  so  far  as  it  is  of  human  origin, 
than  the  gradual  assimilation  of  man’s  ideas  to  the  will  of  God. 
The  growth  of  a code  is  a clear  illustration.  At  first,  among 
savage  tribes,  the  notions  of  justice  are  crude  and  variable  ; so 
changeable,  indeed,  that  nothing  but  the  most  rudimentary 
principles  can  be  considered  fixed.  Force,  directed  by  indi- 
vidual passion  or  caprice,  is  so  powerful,  and  the  general  con- 
ceptions of  right  so  weak,  that  club  law  usually  prevails.  Still, 
at  this  stage,  we  see  that  even  the  names  of  right  and  wrong, 
force  and  law,  show  a struggle  after  the  realization  of  a more 
perfect  system  ; and  this  felt  want  in  time  triumphs  over  the 
chaos,  and  reduces  it  to  order.  The  ideal  of  right  and  justice 
as  the  principles  by  which  men  should  be  controlled,  seen 
dimly  at  first,  just  as  all  abstract  conceptions  must  be  by  the 
uncultivated,  become  clearer  during  the  weary  struggle  be- 
tween right  and  might,  until  at  last  the  divine  will  expresses 
itself  in  a code  claiming  to  provide  for  all  the  relations  of  man 
in  civil  society.  Nor  is  this  code  inferior,  in  point  of  distinct- 
ness, to  any  system  of  scientific  truth  ever  discovered.  The 
Corpus  Juris  Civilis  may  well  take  its  place  by  the  side  of  Eu- 
clid’s Elements , Aristotle’s  Organon,  or  Newton’s  Principia.  For, 
though  the  methods  of  proof  be  different,  they  are  as  convinc- 
ing in  the  one  class  of  ideas  as  the  other.  Demonstration,  as 
we  have  seen,  in  the  most  rigidly  exact  of  all  sciences,  may  pro- 
duce more  than  one  answer,  which  will  satisfy  the  conditions 
of  the  problem.  Yet,  if  the  . terms  be  constant,  but  one  answer 
can  be  correct.  Thus  the  processes  of  Nature  escape  our  notice* 
when  we  are  looking  on,  and  mature  their  results,  which  we 
must  accept,  though  unable  to  account  for  their  production. 
This  shows,  not  the  imperfection  of  the  truth  itself,  or  its  mani- 
festations, but  the  infirmity  of  the  understanding  whose  powers 

‘Bacon,  Nov.  Org.  Aph.  IV.  Reliqua  intus  transegit ; Aph.  X.  Subtilitas 
naturae  subtilitatem  sensus  et  intellectus  multis  partibus  superat. 

[New  Series,  No.  22.)  24 


534 


What  is  Truth  ? 


[July: 


are  hedged  in  by  boundaries  on  all  sides  which  it  cannot  pass. 
Hence,  the  distinction  between  demonstrative  and  what  is  called 
moral  reasoning  has  no  foundation  in  reality,  and  should  be 
abandoned  as  futile.  For  all  that  is  purely  demonstrative  con- 
sists in  postulating  terms,  which  are  either  first  truths,  or  assum- 
ed as  such,  and  therefore  incapable  of  proof,  and,  by  reducing 
them  to  the  syllogistic  form,  compel  a conclusion.  But  this  is, 
in  fact,  a begging  of  the  question,  as  has  often  been  said  of 
Aristotle's  Dictum ; an  assertion  which  is  undoubtedly  true,  if 
considered  apart  from  the  matter  of  the  argument.  For,  as 
you  must  assume  a first  truth  for  a major  premise,  and  thea 
compare  the  extremes  with  this  in  order  to  discover  their  agree- 
ment or  disagreement  with  it,  this  process  rests  in  its  last 
analysis  upon  a petitio  principii.  The  whole  reasoning  starts 
out  from  a truth  assumed  but  not  capable  of  proof — assumed 
because  believed,  not  believed  because  proved.  For  if  it  were 
capable  of  further  proof,  logic  forbids  its  assumption  until  its 
claims  to  credibility  be  established.  This  dealing  with  assump- 
tions, however,  effects  no  progress  ; for  it  is  reasoning  in  a circle, 
as  every  process  must  be  which  employs  only  pure  abstractions. 
This  was  the  field  cultivated  so  assiduously  by  the  logicians  of 
the  Middle  Ages,  yet  nothing  grew  there  but  bristling  subtleties 
and  endless  war  of  words.  But  in  the  so-called  probable  reason- 
ing, which  is  the  only  kind  that  can  have  any  relation  to  us,  if  we 
take  the  labor  sufficient  to  possess  ourselves  of  the  facts,  and 
have  culture  enough  to  comprehend  them  in  their  special  ap- 
plication, we  accept  the  response  they  give  with  as  implicit 
faith  as  the  mind  has  in  its  own  processes.  If  uncertainty 
linger  anywhere,  it  is  because  some  of  the  facts  bearing  on  the 
subject  are  still  hidden  or  not  comprehended.  But  by  increas- 
ing information — that  is,  by  bringing  ourselves  more  into  har- 
mony with  the  subject — we  narrow  down  the  uncertainty  to  us, 
while  confirmed  all  the  time  that  we  are  near  the  truth,  and 
believe  it  as  strongly  as  though  already  in  possession.  Belief 
bridges  over  the  chasm  which  separates  us  from  absolute  knowl- 
edge,* and  does  this  equally  for  the  Christian  and  the  naturalist, 

* Montaigne,  Essais;  Livre,  II,  Chap.  XII.  La  participation  que  nous  avons 
a la  cognoissance  de  la  Verite,  quelle  qu’elle  soit,  ce  n’est  point  par  nos  propres 
forces  que  nous  l’avons  acquise ; Dieu  nous  a assez  apprins  cela  par  les  tesmoigns 
qu’il  a choisis  du  vulgaire,  simples  et  ignorants,  pour  nous  instruire  de  ses  admira- 
biles  secrets. 


i8  77-1 


What  is  Truth  ? 


535 


by  bringing  them  into  harmony  with  that  Infinite  Wisdom 
who  formed  the  relations  which  hold  throughout  the  universe 
of  mind  and  matter.  For  it  is  the  prerogative  of  God,  who 
created  all  things,  to  see  them  just  as  they  are  ; and  hence  the 
nearer  we  are  conformed  to  his  character,  the  closer  we  will 
approach  to  that  standard  of  knowledge.  Consequently,  the 
sum  of  all  knowledge  is,  to  know  God  in  the  person  of  Jesus 
Christ,  who  is  the  embodiment  of  his  will,  and  therefore  of 
the  Truth. 

The  conclusion  to  which  we  arrive  then,  is,  that  all  Truth  is 
one  ; that  it  is  unchanging  ; that  it  can  be  known  with  as  much 
certainty  in  one  department  of  knowledge  as  another,  provided 
the  like  methods  be  employed  in  its  investigation,  and  these 
methods  consist  in  bringing  ourselves  into  harmony  with  its 
subject  matter.  Hence,  no  man  who  is  a skeptic  can  be  a safe 
guide  in  scientific  inquiries,  much  less  in  morals  ; for  his  method 
is  radically  vicious.  “ Falsrts  in  uno,  falsus  in  omnibus,"  is  an 
incontrovertible  maxim  of  human  nature.  However  much 
progress  he  may  make  in  his  special  researches,  he  cherishes  so 
much  error  of  method  by  habitual  unbelief  that  all  is  thereby 
vitiated.  For,  just  as  in  spiritual  things,  he  who  clings  to  one 
violation  of  God’s  law  will  sap  all  his  own  moral  character,  and 
make  shipwreck  of  faith  ; so  he  who  admits  one  false  principle 
in  his  scientific  investigation  will  tincture  the  whole  with  error, 
and  convict  himself  of  folly. 


53^ 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


Art.  IX— THE  GENERAL  ASSEMBLY. 

The  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  the 
Ijnited  States  of  America  met  in  Farwell  Hall,  Chicago,  111.,  on 
the  17th  of  May,  1877.  It  was  organized  by  the  election  of 
the  Rev.  James  Eells,  D.D.,  of  Oakland,  California,  as  Modera- 
tor, whose  prompt  and  wise  rulings,  firm  and  courteous  bearing, 
greatly  facilitated  the  dispatch  of  business  and  promoted  the 
order  of  the  body. 

The  time  required  for  the  judicious  selection  of  committees 
and  preparation  of  business  is  represented  to  have  left  the 
body  with  little  to  do  the  first  three  days  of  the  session.  The 
evils  of  such  a state  of  things  are  so  many  and  obvious  that 
none  will  dispute  the  importance  of  devising  a remedy.  For 
this  we  have  not  far  to  seek.  It  can  be  had  in  two  ways  : 1. 
Arrangements  may  be  made  for  proceeding  forthwith  with  the 
reports  from  the  boards  of  the  church,  although  these  must  usu- 
ally go  to  their  appropriate  committees,  whose  reports  must 
come  in,  before  the  Assembly  becomes  ready  finally  to  dispose  of 
the  questions  that  may  arise.  Still, we  think  arrangements  might 
be  made  by  which  all  matters  pertaining  to  them,  not  involving 
debatable  questions  of  policy,  might  be  at  once  disposed  of, 
such  as  hearing  the  reports,  with  the  general  statements  and 
speeches  of  the  secretaries  and  others.  2.  Another  way  of 
occupying  the  first  days  of  the  meeting  is  to  hear,  discuss  and 
dispose  of  reports  of  committees  appointed  by  previous  Assem- 
blies to  report  to  the  next.  There  are  always  some  such  re- 
ports to  be  made,  often  on  important  subjects.  In  the  Assembly 
at  St.  Louis,  in  1874,  the  majority  and  minority  reports  of  a 
committee  on  the  consolidation  of  the  boards  were  made  at 
the  very  beginning  of  the  session,  and  the  time  of  the  Assembly 
from  the  very  first  was  fully  occupied  with  the  discussion  and 
disposal  of  this  subject,  when  not  occupied  with  other  matters. 
Thus  full  justice  was  done  to  this  great  question  of  that  ses- 
sion, while  other  matters  received  their  usual,  but,  in  too 
many’cases,  inadequate  attention ; we  say  inadequate,  because 
some -crude  deliverances,  abstract  and  concrete,  were  hastily 
rushed  through  the  body  near  its  close.  Many  such  would 
die  before  coming  to  their  birth,  if  they  could  be  properly  dis- 


1 877.] 


The  General  Assembly. 


53  7 


cussed.  Fortunately  most  of  these  lie  dead  upon  the  records, 
and  are  never  heard  of  afterward.  But  some  live  to  cause  a 
sad  amount  of  needless  irritation  and  discord.  We  shall  pro- 
ceed to  notice  a few  of  the  topics  which  engaged  the  attention 
of  the  Assembly. 

REDUCED  REPRESENTATION. 

Both  overtures  sent  down  by  the  previous  Assembly  to  the 
Presbyteries,  for  such  a change  in  the  basis  of  representation  as 
will  sufficiently  reduce  the  size  of  the  Assembly,  were  rejected 
by  decisive  majorities.  This  result  disappointed  no  one.  The 
report  of  the  committee  appointed  by  the  last  Assembly  on 
the  subject  was  also  presented.  Although  this  virtually  ad- 
vised acquiescence  in  the  present  basis  for  a time,  with  an  en- 
largement of  the  minimum  number  of  ministers  requisite  to 
institute  a Presbytery,  in  order  to  mitigate  the  growing  in- 
equality in  the  basis  of  representation,  and  slightly  check  the 
increase  of  the  Assembly,  yet  the  sense  of  the  evils  of  the 
present  system  is  too  keen  and  wide-spread  to  admit  of  any 
quietus  not  provided  in  their  removal  or  abatement.  It  was 
forced  upon  the  Assembly  by  the  utter  absence  of  invitations 
from  any  place  for  the  next  Assembly.  No  .place  wanted,  or 
felt  itself  equal  to,  the  task  of  entertaining  so  vast  a body  for 
two  weeks.  It  has  been  quite  a fashion  to  decry  reference  to 
the  burden  upon  hospitality  as  a petty  thing,  very  unworthy 
to  come  into  the  argument  on  this  subject.  This  will  do  for 
romance  and  sentiment ; and  if  these  were  the  only  elements 
in  the  case,  it  might  safely  be  ignored.  But  excessive  demands 
upon  hospitality  have  their  own  way  of  compelling  consider- 
ation. When  no  place  can  be  found  willing  to  undertake  the 
burthen,  it  being  too  grievous  to  be  borne,  then  it  will  have 
weight  in  the  argument  and  policy  adopted.  The  case  of  the 
annual  conventions  of  the  American  Board,  so  often  alleged 
for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  the  entertainment  of  vast 
numbers  of  people  may  be  easily  accomplished,  is  not 
parallel.  That  is  a meeting  for  only  two  or  three  days.  Let 

it  extend  itself  for  a fortnight,  and  how  many  places 
would  be  found  to  welcome  the  convocation  ? The  churches 
in  the  cities  in  which  the  Assembly  has  met  since  the  reunion 
have,  after  exhausting  the  possibilities  of  private  hospitality, 
been  put  to  an  expense  of  thousands  of  dollars  for  the  enter- 


538 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


tainment  of  the  body.  What  conceivable  justice  is  there  in 
the  whole  church  imposing  such  an  assessment  on  the  Presby- 
terians of  a single  city? 

The  subject,  therefore,  has  not  been  and  cannot  be  laid  to 
rest.  The  Assembly  referred  the  whole  subject  to  a new  com- 
mittee, of  which  Dr.  Van  Dyke  was  Chairman.  They  renewed 
the  recommendation  of  Synodical  representation  on  the  basis 
of  two  delegates,  one  Minister  and  one  Elder  for  every  fifty 
ministers  or  fractions  thereof.  The  result  was  that  after 
recommitment  and  amendment,  following  the  most  searching 
discussion,  it  was  agreed  by  a nearly  unanimous  vote  to  send 
down  the  following  alternative  overtures  to  the  Presbyteries: 

Shall  Chap.  XII,  Sec.  2,  of  the  Form  of  Government,  be  so  amended 
as  to  read  : *•  The  General  Assembly  shall  consist  of  an  equal  delega- 
tion of  Bishops  and  Elders  from  each  Synod  in  the  following  propor- 
tions, viz. : Each  Synod  consisting  of  not  more  than  fifty  ministers 
shall  send  one  minister  and  one  elder ; and  each  Synod  consisting  of 
more  than  fifty  ministers  shall  send  two  ministers  and  two  elders;  and 
in  the  like  proportion  for  any  fifty  ministers  in  any  Synod ; and  these 
delegates  so  appointed  shall  be  styled  Commissioners  to  the  General 
Assembly. 

“ The  Commissioners  shall  be  chosen  by  the  Synod  with  due  regard 
to  the  rights  of  its  Presbyteries.  If  the  Synod  send  three  or  more 
ministers  or  three  or  more  Elders  to  the  General  Assembly,  not  more 
than  one-third  of  its  Commissioners,  and  if  it  send  two  ministers  and 
two  elders,  not  more  than  one-half  of  its  Commissioners,  in  any  year, 
shall  be  taken  from  the  Presbytery,  and  in  a series  of  years  equal  to 
the  number  of  Presbyteries  in  any  Synod.  At  each  stated  meeting  of 
the  Synod  it  shall  be  determined  and  announced  which  of  the  Presby- 
teries composing  it  are  entitled  to  furnish  Commissioners  to  the  General 
Assembly  to  be  held  next  to  the  one  ensuing,  and  to  how  many  Com- 
missioners, ministers,  or  elders,  or  both,  such  Presbyteries  are  re- 
spectively entitled.  And  prior  to  each  election  of  Commissioners  by 
the  Synod,  the  list  of  the  Presbyteries  entitled  to  furnish  Commission- 
ers at  that  time  shall  be  read,  and  each  such  Presbytery  shall  be  called 
on  to  nominate,  through  its  representative  or  representatives,  who  shall 
have  been  designated  by  it  for  the  purpose,  as  many  Commissioners  as 
it  is  entitled  to  furnish,  and  an  equal  number  of  alternates.  If  such 
nominations  are  not  made,  the  Synod  shall,  nevertheless,  proceed  with 
the  election;  every  Presbytery  shall  be  represented  by  at  least  one 
minister  and  one  elder.” 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


539 


Also,  shall  Chap.  XXII.,  Sec.  i,  be  so  amended  as  to  read:  “ The 
Commissioners  to  the  General  Assembly  shall  always  be  appointed  by 
the  Synod  from  which  they  came  at  the  meeting  next  preceding  the 
meeting  of  the  General  Assembly,  and  as  much  as  possible  to  prevent 
all  failure  in  the  representation  of  the  Synods  arising  from  unforeseen 
accidents  to  those  first  appointed,  it  may  be  expedient  for  each  Synod 
to  appoint  an  alternate  to  each  Commissioner  to  supply  his  place  in 
case  of  his  necessary  absence  ” ? 

And  in  Art.  II.  shall  the  word  “ Presbytery,”  wherever  it  occurs,  be 
changed  to  “ Synod  ” ? 

Your  Committee  recommend  that  the  foregoing  overture  be  trans- 
mitted by  the  Assembly  to  the  Presbyteries  for  their  action. 

Your  Committee  also  recommend  that  the  following  alternative  over- 
ture be  transmitted  to  the  Presbyteries  : 

Shall  Chap.  XII.,  Sec.  2,  of  the  Form  of  Government  be  amended  so 
as  to  read  : “ The  General  Assembly  shall  consist  of  an  equal  delega- 
tion of  Bishops  and  elders  from  each  Presbytery  in  the  following  pro- 
portion, viz. : Each  Presbytery  consisting  of  not  more  than  forty  minis- 
ters actually  engaged  in  ministerial  work  as  pastors,  co-pastors,  pastors- 
elect,  stated  supplies,  evangelists,  missionaries,  professors  in  theologi- 
cal seminaries,  or  those  assigned  to  the  work  of  the  Church  by  the 
General  Assembly,  shall  send  one  minister  and  one  elder;  each  Pres- 
bytery consisting  of  more  than  forty  and  less  than  eighty  ministers,  em- 
ployed as  above  specified,  shall  send  two  ministers  and  two  elders  ; 
each  Presbytery  consisting  of  more  than  eighty  and  less  than  120 
ministers,  employed  as  above  specified,  shall  send  three  ministers  and 
three  elders  in  like  proportion  for  each  additional  forty  ministers 
actually  engaged  in  ministerial  work;  and  these  delegates  so  appointed 
shall  be  styled  Commissioners  to  the  General  Assembly”  ? 

It  was  also  ordered  that  meanwhile,  until  a decided  reduction 
of  the  Assembly  can  be  accomplished,  an  assessment  be  made 
upon  the  churches  of  two  cents  per  member,  in  addition  to  that 
now  made  for  the  mileage  fund,  to  be  paid  to  the  Committee 
on  Entertainment  for  each  Assembly,  so  as  to  aid  them  in  mak- 
ing provision  for  it.  This  is  simply  just.  It  lays  upon  the 
whole  church,  and  not  the  Presbyterians  of  some  single  city, 
the  burden  of  paying  for  that  portion  of  the  entertainment  of 
Assemblies  to  which  private  hospitality  is  inadequate. 

In  regard  to  the  overtures  themselves,  it  is  not  unlikely  that 
one  will  defeat  the  other.  But  together  they  voice  and  evince 
the  almost  unanimous  judgment  of  our  church  that  the  As- 


540 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July: 


sembly  ought  to  be  reduced,  and  its  readiness  to  work  at  the 
problem  till  some  satisfactory  solution  is  reached.  In  regard 
to  the  comparative  merits  of  these  overtures  we  have  only  to 
say  that  the  Synodical  method  affords  the  easy  and  natural 
basis  for  a reduction  of  representation,  which  can  be  carried  to 
any  extent  as  the  future  growth  of  our  church  may  require, 
and  always  preserve  the  nearest  possible  approach  to  a sub- 
stantial equality  of  representation  of  the  different  portions  of 
the  church.  We  see  no  conceivable  objection  to  it  on  prin- 
ciple. The  Book,  chap,  xi : I.,  defines  the  Synod  thus:  “As 
the  Presbytery  is  a convention  of  the  Bishops  and  Elders 
within  a certain  district,  so  a Synod  is  a convention  of  the 
bishops  and  elders  within  a larger  district.”  It  is  only  a larger 
Presbytery’.  But  for  reasons  so  well  understood  that  they 
need  not  here  be  specified,  there  is  a widely  prevalent  and 
deeply-rooted  aversion  to  taking  the  power  of  election  out  of 
the  hands  of  the  Presbyteries.  We  and,  so  far  as  we  know,  all 
the  advocates  of  reduction  are  desirous  of  still  conserving  this 
Presbyterial  privilege  so  far  as  is  possible  without  sacrificing 
other  essential  principles.  Although  we  have  favored  the  two 
previous  overtures  in  favor  of  Synodical  representation,  yet  in 
the  failure  of  these  we  ourselves  have  also  in  committee 
recommended  one  much  less  to  our  taste,  in  the  hope  it  might 
prove  more  acceptable.  It  counted  as  the  basis  mainly  pastors 
and  missionaries,  and  retained  the  present  number,  24,  as  the 
unitary  basis  of  representation  of  Presbyteries  by  one  pastor  and 
elder.  It  was  rejected  summarily,  to  say  nothing  more.  The 
same  has  been  true  of  every  attempt  at  thorough  reduction 
thus  far  made,  by  retaining  Presbyterial  and  evading  Synodi- 
cal representation.  In  the  overture  now  made  for  Synodical 
representation,  provision  is  made  to  secure  to  each  Presbytery 
of  the  Synod  the  nomination  of  its  due  proportion  of  dele- 
gates, in  the  hope  of  thus  meeting  the  demand  for  Presbyterial, 
while  adopting  the  method  of  Synodical  representation.  It 
remains  to  be  seen  whether  it  will  be  accepted  and  ratified  as 
an  adequate  concession  to  that  demand- 

The  alternative  overture  still  retains  the  representation  ex- 
clusively by  Presbyteries.  It  makes  40  the  unitary  basis  in- 
stead of  50,  the  number  adopted  in  the  overture  of  last  year, 
which  was  objected  to  by  an  overwhelming  majority.  It 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


541 


makes  the  disproportion  between  the  representation  of  small 
and  large  Presbyteries  less  than  that  just  rejected,  but  still,  in 
our  opinion,  altogether  too  great.  We  can  conceive  of  meas- 
ures of  the  most  vital  importance  under  that  system  being 
carried  or  defeated  by  the  representatives  of  a very  decided 
minority  of  the  church.  We  do  not  believe  this  to  be  right  or 
salutary.  It  is  to  no  purpose  to  adduce  the  case  of  the  U.  S. 
Senate,  in  which  the  smallest  and  largest  States  are  equally 
represented.  The  House  of  Representatives,  which  is  appor- 
tioned upon  the  basis  of  the  population  of  the  States,  together 
with  the  Presidential  veto,  offsets  the  Senate  and  completely 
neutralizes  the  danger  referred  to.  This,  therefore,  affords  no 
parallel.  Aside  of  this  aspect  and  tendency  of  the  overture, 
we  would  not  complain  of  another  feature,  which  rules  out  our- 
selves from  any  place  in  the  basis  of  representation  along  with 
other  editors  of  Presbyterian  journals,  and  professors  in  Pres- 
byterian colleges.  We  once  ourselves,  for  the  sake  of  accom- 
plishing reduction,  took  part  in  preparing  an  overture  having 
this  feature.  But  who  are  those  “assigned  to  the  work  of  the 
church  by  the  General  Assembly”?  Do  they  include  the 
members  and  secretaries  of  the  boards  who  are  otherwise  with- 
out ecclesiastical  charge?  We  think  the  line  thus  attempted 
to  be  drawn  somewhat  arbitrary  and  undefined.  But  we  do’ 
not  object.  It  must  be  arbitrary,  if  drawn  at  all.  For  better 
or  for  worse,  this  plan  is  only  a temporary  palliative,  not  a 
permanent  remedy  for  the  evils  under  which  we  now  labor. 
But  this  would  be  far  better  than  nothing,  were  it  not  that  it 
makes  it  possible  for  one  group  of  40  ministers  to  be  the  basis 
for  several  times  as  many  votes  in  the  Assembly  as  another 
40  of  equal  capacity  and  fidelity  to  the  true  church.  But 
whether  either  of  these  plans  is  sanctioned  by  the  Presbyteries, 
or  not,  we  are  sure  that  a way  will  soon  be  found  for  accom- 
plishing what  is  so  generally  felt  to  be  a necessity — a large  re- 
duction of  the  Assembly.  The  question  of  entertainment 
aside,  so  large  a gathering  is  unfavorable  to  the  proper  matur- 
ing and  due  dispatch  of  business.  The  analogy  sometimes 
claimed  to  exist  between  the  present  Assembly  and  the 
British  House  of  Commons  in  this  respect  fails,  simply  be- 
cause six  hundred  men  sitting  for  prolonged  periods  of  months 
and  years  may  overcome  difficulties  arising  from  its  own  mag- 


542 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


nitude  which  are  insurmountable  by  a body  of  the  same  size, 
composed  mostly  of  new  and  inexperienced  members  sitting 
only  two  weeks.  Closely  connected  with  this  is  the  subject 
of  a 

Final  Court  of  Appeals, 

brought  up  in  a report  from  a committee  appointed  by  the 
last  Assembly,  of  which  Dr.  Musgrav.e  was  chairman.  It  was 
referred  to  another  committee,  who  reported  it  back,  some- 
what amended,  in  the  form  of  an  overture  to  be  sent  down  to 
the  Presbyteries  for  sanction,  as  an  amendment  to  the  constitu- 
tion. It  was,  however,  referred  to  the  next  Assembly,  being 
deemed  as  yet  too  crude  and  imperfect  in  form  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  Presbyteries.  Some  were  for  strangling  it  at  once, 
denouncing  the  whole  project  as  needless,  and  tending  to  a 
sort  of  star-chamber  inquisition  or  despotism.  The  majority 
of  the  Assembly,  however,  appear  to  have  been  impressed 
with  the  necessity  of  seeking  some  plan  of  accomplishing  the 
objects  for  which  this  tribunal  is  designed.  It  is  quite  clear 
that  a body  of  six  hundred  men,  crowded  with  more  non-judi- 
cial business  than  it  can  well  handle,  is  unfitted  for  any  judicial 
business  beyond  the  decision  of  questions  of  doctrine  and 
order,  pure  and  simple,  to  which,  if  reduced  to  half  the  number, 
it  would  be  less  unsuited ; still  it  would  remain  seriously  un- 
fitted for  the  work,  incapable  of  fairly  digesting  and  issuing 
half  the  appeals  and  complaints  that  must  inevitably  reach  it 
from  the  various  parts  of  a communion  so  widely  extended. 
This  was  felt  and  urged  by  Dr.  Hodge  and  others  thirty  years 
ago,  when  the  churches  and  assemblies  were  less  than  half  the 
present  size.  The  exigency  is  met  partially  at  present  by 
judicial  committees  and  temporary  judicial  commissions,  ap- 
pointed by  each  Assembly  pro  re  nala.  The  only  question  is, 
whether  it  shall  be  provided  for  in  future  by  such  temporary 
and  casual  expedients,  or  by  a permanent  tribunal,  one-third 
of  whose  members  shall  have  their  terms  of  office  expire  each 
year,  the  vacancies  thus  arising  to  be  filled  by  the  General 
Assembly?  We  confess  that  this  question  seems  to  us  not 
altogether  one-sided.  The  advantages  of  a permanent  tribu- 
nal. with  its  records,  precedents,  by-laws  and  growing  experi- 
ence in  ecclesiastical  litigation,  are  obvious.  But  then  the 
possible  tendency  toward  a set  of  rigid,  cast-iron  precedents, 


I877-J 


The  General  Assembly. 


543 


whereby  technicalities  become  petrified,  so  as  to  constrain  the 
free  actings  of  that  eternal  justice  they  were  invented  to  sup- 
port, is  not  to  be  overlooked  or  ignored. 

The  Sewickley  Church  Case— Publication  of  Sunday 
Newspapers  by  Church  Members. 

The  editor  and  publisher  of  the  Pittsburgh  Leader , which 
issues  a Sunday  edition,  is  a member  of  the  church  in  Sewick- 
ley, which  quick  railroad  connections  make  a virtual  suburb  of 
Pittsburgh.  The  session  of  that  church  has  taken  no  steps  to 
discipline  him,  although  often  urged  to  do  so.  The  Presbytery 
of  Allegheny,  to  which  the  Sewickley  church  belongs,  enjoined 
the  session  to  proceed  to  take  action  upon  the  case,  and  inves- 
tigate the  charges  so  loudly  made  by  the  tongue  of  common 
fame.  The  session  appears  to  have  been  in  doubt  as  to  their 
■duty,  or  for  some  reason  determined  to  take  no  step  until 
they  could  obtain  a deliverance  from  the  General  Assembly 
touching  the  present  interpretation  and  application  to  such 
cases  of  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  as  laid  down  in  our  stand- 
ards. They  accordingly  referred  the  order  of  Presbyetery  to 
the  Synod  of  Erie,  which  reaffirmed  it  in  a very  emphatic  and 
decisive  manner,  and  finally  referred  this  action  of  Synod  to 
the  Assembly  for  its  decision  in  the  premises.  The  Assem- 
bly, after  earnest  and  thorough  discussion,  with  only  three 
votes  in  the  negative,  adopted  the  following  paper,  reported 
from  the  Commitee  of  Bills  and  Overtures: 

First — This  Assembly  reaffirms  the  resolutions  adopted  by  the 
Synod  and  Presbyter}'  setting  forth  the  binding  obligation  of  the 
Fourth  Commandment  as  expounded  in  the  standards  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  and  in  the  repeated  deliverances  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly ; and  also  the  declarations  of  Synod  and  Presbytery : That  any 

voluntary  and  responsible  participation  in  the  publication  and  sale  of  a 
Sunday  newspaper  is  inconsistent  alike  with  the  decree  of  the  law  of 
God  and  with  membership  in  the  Presbyterian  Church. 

Second — -That  it  is  entirely  within  the  constitutional  authority  of  a Pres- 
bytery to  direct  the  sessions  of  a church  under  its  care  to  proceed  ac- 
cording to  the  Book  of  Discipline,  and  that  it  is  competent  for  a Synod 
to  reaffirm  such  instructions  upon  a reference  of  a case  asking  for  its 
advice.  That  the  session  of  the  church  of  Sewickley  were  bound  to 


544 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


carry  out  the  plain  meaning  of  the  instructions  of  the  Presbytery  of 
Allegheny,  and  that  their  reasons  for  declining  to  do  so  are  insufficient. 

Third — That  the  proper  remedy  for  the  Presbytery  to  apply  to  that 
session,  if  they  continue  to  disobey  the  instructions  of  the  Presbytery, 
is  to  put  the  session  under  discipline  for  contumacy. 

The  protest  signed  by  Dr.  Bettinger,  Pastor  of  the  Sewickley 
Church,  and  two  others,  in  its  fifth  article  brings  to  view  the 
main  issues  on  which  the  discussion  turned,  and  is  as  follows : 

5.  We  protest  because  the  exception  seems  invidious,  since,  if  its 
application  is  correct,  it  singles  out  one  class  of  offenders — the  pub- 
lishers of  Sunday  papers — a very  small  class,  while  it  passes  over  to 
the  respective  Sessions  of  our  churches  the  thousands,  if  not  tens  of 
thousands,  of  similar  offenders  against  the  Fourth  Commandment — 
all  those  violators  of  the  Sabbath — who  voluntarily  continue  employ- 
ers or  stockholders  in  the  various  Sabbath-breaking  commercial  and 
manufacturing  agencies  and  establishments  which  a modern  civilization 
has  brought  with  it. 

This  is  a leading  case,  and  bids  fair  to  be  the  precursor  of 
others  through  which  the  mind  of  our  Church  will  gradually 
unfold  and  define  itself,  not  with  reference  to  the  sanctity  of 
the  Sabbath  or  the  general  law  of  its  observance,  but  with  ref- 
erence to  its  judicial  interpretation  and  application  to  parties 
implicated  in  what  the  protest  calls  “ the  various  Sabbath-break- 
ing commercial  and  manufacturing  agencies  which  a modern 
civilization  has  brought  with  it.”  The  great  question,  indeed, 
is,  which  of  them  is  or  is  not  “ Sabbath-breaking”  ? Nor  is  it 
possible  to  formulate  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  more  than  any 
other  law,  human  or  divine,  so  that  all  the  varying  cases  and 
circumstances  that  may  arise  can  be  foreseen,  or  its  application 
to  them  determined  in  advance.  We  deem  the  law  of  the 
Sabbath,  as  expressed  in  our  standards  and  summarized  in  the 
Shorter  Catechism , to  be  as  accurately  expressed  as  is  possible  in 
our  language,  and,  as  such,  to  be  of  perpetual  obligation.  “ The 
Sabbath  is  to  be  sanctified  by  a holy  resting  on  that  day,  even 
from  such  worldly  employments  and  recreations  as  are  lawful  on 
other  days ; and  spending  the  whole  time  in  the  public  and 
private  exercises  of  God’s  worship,  except  so  much  as  is  to  be 
taken  up  in  the  works  of  necessity  and  mercy.”  It  is  obvious, 
however,  that  the  words  “ worship,”  “ necessity”  and  “ mercy” 
in  this  statement  must  be  understood  somewhat  broadly,  in 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


545 


order  to  acquit  vast  numbers  of  Christians,  who  are  of  un- 
challenged piety,  from  the  charge  of  Sabbath  desecration.  And 
it  is  no  less  obvious  that,  in  its  application  to  new  cases  and 
circumstances,  everything  depends  upon  the  breadth  or  nar- 
rowness of  construction  we  give  to  the  terms  “ necessity  and 
mercy.”  Is  the  “ necessity”  intended  absolute,  the  contrary 
of  which  cannot  be  in  the  nature  of  things,  or  without  the 
most  palpable  and  demonstrable  injury  to  the  soul  or  body, 
the  individual  or  society,  the  Church  or  the  world,  God  or 
man?  Oris  it  a relative  necessity,  a necessity  only  as  it  is 
judged  to  be  beneficial  in  the  slightest  degree,  to  the  health, 
the  comfort,  the  welfare  of  ourselves  or  others?  And  of  the 
things  supposed  to  be,  in  this  sense,  necessary  to  man’s  highest 
good,  who  is  the  judge,  or  how  far  is  it  to  be  left  to  the  judg- 
ment and  conscience  of  the  individual  Christian,  or  the  Church 
courts,  or  each  for  each,  within  its  due  sphere,  and  what  are  the 
bounds  of  that  sphere  ? The  same,  too,  of  mercy.  Mercy  re- 
quires those  services  on  our  part  which  mitigate  or  prevent 
suffering,  or  danger  to  the  life  and  health  of  man,  and  often  of 
beast.  But  who  shall  undertake  to  say  how  much  of  the  labor 
done  on  the  Sabbath  without  scruple  by  most  Christian  people 
might  be  avoided  without  loss  or  harm  of  any  sort  to  man  or 
beast  ? Such  queries  show  how  much  remains  to  be  done  be- 
fore unmistakable  lines  of  clear  and  sharp  definition  can  be 
drawn  in  reference  to  the  law  of  the  Sabbath,  in  its  applications. 

By  this,  however,  we  do  not  mean  that  there  is  ordinarily  any 
difficulty  for  the  candid  mind  in  determining  what  is,  and  what 
is  not,  a desecration  of  the  Sabbath  in  any  concrete  case.  But 
there  is  great  difficulty  in  formulating  definitions  and  phrasing 
detailed  rules  so  that  they  will  precisely  include  all  actual  cases 
of  Sabbath  desecration  and  exclude  all  others.  It  is  commonly 
supposed  that  accurate  definition  is  in  fact,  as  it  is  logically,  the 
first  step  in  any  science.  But  with  respect  to  all  but  the  formal 
sciences,  all  the  sciences  of  actual  being,  accurate  definition  has 
been  shown  to  be  the  last  achievement.  Nevertheless,  people 
know  objects  from  each  other,  though  they  cannot  specify  the 
marks  of  the  difference.  The  most  untutored  know  a man  from 
an  animal,  and  humanity  from  brutality,  though  they  cannot  ac- 
curately define  the  differentia,  just  as  all  can  distinguish  differ- 
ent faces  and  chirographies,  although,  on  the  witness-stand,  a 


546 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July: 


lawyer  might  puzzle  them  out  of  their  wits  in  trying  to  worm 
out  of  them  the  differential  marks  So,  by  a sort  of  holy  intu- 
ition, the  great  mass  of  God’s  people  clearly  discern  whether 
given  actions  have  or  have  not  in  them  the  Sabbath-breaking 
element,  although  they  cannot  give  anything  more  than  a con- 
fused or  inadequate  definition  of  this  element  in  them.  The 
larger  part  of  the  knowledge  of  men  does  not  get  beyond  the 
first  of  three  stages,  severally  noted  by  philosophers  as  Clear, 
Distinct  and  Adequate.  Education,  Science,  Philosophy  are  ever 
struggling  onward  from  the  first  toward  the  last  stage  of  ade- 
quate, or  relatively  perfect  knowledge.  Now,  in  this  light,  we 
should  think  few  would  have  any  difficulty  in  adjudging  the 
publication  of  a Sabbath  newspaper,  in  ordinary  times  and  cir- 
cumstances, a violation  of  the  Sabbath.  It  is  a piece  of  secular 
work  wrought  on  the  Sabbath,  not  only  demanded  by  neither 
“ necessity,”  nor  “ mercy,”  but  diverting  the  minds  of  vast 
numbers  from  the  sanctities  of  divine  worship  to  the  secular- 
ises of  this  world.  While  the  publication  of  bulletins  of  news 
in  times  of  war,  revolutions,  or  great  public  catastrophes,  may 
fall  under  the  category  of  works  of  necessity  and  mercy,  as  welL 
as  a thousand  things  done  by  the  best  of  people  without  cen- 
sure or  question,  this  does  not  excuse  the  publication  of  a Sun- 
day newspaper  in  ordinary  times,  whose  only  influence  must 
be  to  divert  and  distract  multitudes  of  people  from  the  proper 
observance  of  the  Sabbath. 

Indeed,  we  do  not  understand  the  defenders  of  theSewickley 
Session  to  dispute  this.  The  protest  of  Dr.  Bittinger,  as  above 
quoted,  distinctly  classes  the  Sunday  newspaper  with  “ Sab- 
bath-breaking”  agencies,  and  its  owners  and  publishers  among 
the  “offenders  against  the  Fourth  Commandment,”  “violators  of 
the  Sabbath.”  But  Dr.  Bittinger  raises  the  point  that  the  defi- 
nitions laid  down  by  the  Assembly  do  not  clearly  distinguish  it 
from  other  “ Sabbath-breaking  agencies,”  which  no  one  thinks 
of  interfering  with  by  church  discipline,  or  otherwise  than  by 
leaving  them  to  the  discretion  of  church  sessions.  He  said  in 
the  debate : 

“ Now,  why  was  this  case  made  an  exception  ? Thai  was  what  he 
complained  of — if  he  had  any  ground  for  complaint  at  all.  And  why 
was  it  insisted  that  the  church  in  question  should  not  have  further  time  ? 
But,  it  would  seem,  it  must  be  brought  up  step  by  step  until  the  As- 


1877  ] 


The  General  Assembly. 


54  7 


sembly  was  supposed  to  stand  against  the  recalcitrant  session  of  the 
little  church  nestled  among  the  hills.  That  church  stood  by  the 
theoretical  doctrine  of  the  Sabbath,  but  did  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
as  a Church,  consistently  live  up  to  that  doctrine  ? What,  then,  would 
become  of  the  great  railroad  corporations?  Did  Presbyterians  hold 
any  stock  in  them  ? What  became  of  the  Sabbath  when  street-cars 
were  run  in  Chicago  and  all  other  great  cities  ? Was  this  a work  of 
necessity  ? Must  the  Fourth  Commandment  be  broken  in  order  that 
God’s  people  might  be  religious?  Why  were  the  Sunday  trains  run, 
and  why  did  ministers  travel  on  them  to  preach  the  Gospel?” 

We  confess  that,  while  it  is  no  good  reason  for  failing  in  the 
proper  use  of  church  discipline  in  this  case,  that  it  is  omitted 
in  others  to  which  consistency  would  require  its  application,  it 
is  none  the  less  true  that  the  church  should  seek  consistency 
in  her  action,  and  try  so  to  enunciate  her  principles  and  laws 
that  they  will  cohere  and  harmonize,  not  only  with  each  other, 
but  with  her  practice,  and  that  her  exercise  of  discipline  also 
shall  be  self-consistent.  And  we  do  not  quite  see  that  she  has 
reached  a deliverance  on  the  subject  that  squarely  meets  the 
queries  above  propounded.  The  minute  adopted  makes  only 
that  participation  in  the  ownership  and  publication  of  a Sun- 
day newspaper  which  is  “ voluntary  and  responsible”  amenable 
to  Church  censure.  But  what  participation,  in  the  case  of  any 
who  have  control  over  their  own  property  and  faculties,  can  be 
otherwise  than  “ voluntary  and  responsible”  ? And  does,  or 
does  not,  the  same  question  apply  equally  to  the  ownership  of 
stock  in  horse  or  steam  railways,  or  steamers,  or  the  use  of 
cars  and  trains  run  on  the  Sabbath,  even  if  they  be  Sunday  or 
church  trains?  We  confess  that  we  were  nevermore  surprised 
than  when  spending  a Sabbath  in  Pittsburg,  at  the  consumma- 
tion of  the  Reunion,  to  read  and  hear  of  “ church  trains”  run 
to  that  Presbyterian  centre  from  the  neighboring  villages. 
We  remembered  how  a delegate  from  the  General  Association 
of  Connecticut,  at  an  Assembly  meeting  in  that  city  before 
the  disruption  in  1837,  told  us,  on  his  return,  that  it  and  the 
region  around  it  were  beginning  to  surpass  New  England  in 
the  all-pervasive  hold  which  Christianity,  with  its  institutions 
and  manners,  had  of  the  people.  He  said  that  New  England 
would  soon  be  compelled  to  confess  that  the  glory  is  departed 
to  the  West,  which  was  coming  to  eclipse  the  East.  Certainly 


548 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


we  have  heard  of  no  church  trains  on  the  railways  of  New 
England  or  the  East.  But  we  have  seen  a great  decline  in  the 
standard  of  Sabbath-keeping  in  New  England.  We  recently 
attended  one  of  the  leading  orthodox  churches  in  Massachu- 
setts, famous  for  its  long  line  of  pastors  of  national  fame,  who 
had  been  among  the  foremost  promoters  of  strict,  puritanical 
Sabbath  observance,  and  opposers  of  Sunday  mails,  et  id genus 
ornne.  We  saw  the  leading  members  of  that  congregation  go 
directly  from  the  morning  service  to  get  their  mails  at  the 
post-office  across  the  street.  This  appeared  to  be  deemed  as 
much  a matter  of  course  and  beyond  exception  as  walking 
or  riding  to  church.  And  we  fear  that  this  is  an  index  of  the 
general  relaxation  of  Sabbath  observance  which  has  stealthily 
overspread  that  land,  until  lately,  beyond  all  countries  except 
Scotland,  celebrated  for  the  strictness  of  its  Sabbath  observ- 
ance. Nor  is  New  England  alone  in  this  degeneracy,  as  the 
facts,  not  so  much  brought  to  view  as  recognized  beyond  dis- 
pute, in  this  Assembly  discussion  about  the  Sewickley  case 
abundantly  prove. 

But,  after  all,  are  the  “ church  trains”  necessarily  in  viola- 
tion of  the  Sabbath  ? Circumstances,  it  seems  to  us,  must  de- 
termine in  each  case.  It  may  be.  The  presumption,  where 
they  are  freely  used  by  the  Christian  public,  till  the  contrary  is 
made  to  appear,  is  that  they  come  under  the  condition  of 
necessity  and  mercy,  i.  e.,  that  they  enable  more  people  to  at- 
tend public  worship  with  far  less  labor  for  man  and  beast  than 
would  otherwise  be  required.  We  suppose  it  must  be  for  this 
reason  that  the  ministers  to  whom  Dr.  Bittinger  refers  use 
them.  Otherwise  we  are  sure  we  must  have  heard  some  pro- 
test in  the  Presbyterian  Ba?iner,  which  is  not  apt  to  utter  an 
uncertain  sound.  We  judge  that  it  is  due  to  the  same  princi- 
ple that  in  the  large  cities  the  running  of  street  horse-cars  on 
the  Sabbath  so  largely  prevails  and  continues,  and  that  they 
are  patronized  by  great  multitudes  of  Christian  people  without 
scruple  in  going  to  public  worship  on  the  Sabbath,  notwith- 
standing the  earnest  and  persistent  opposition  which  for  a 
time  they  met  from  the  Christian  community — an  opposition 
always  justified,  and  often  effective,  wrhere  no  such  necessity 
prevails.  In  the  immense  growth  of  cities,  largely  due  to 
steam  and  electricity,  all  the  arrangements  of  life,  and  es- 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


549 


pecially  of  residence  and  business,  are  determined  at  once 
by  the  necessities  created  and  the  conveniences  afforded  by 
the  modern  modes  of  cheap  and  expeditious  public  convey- 
ance. Thus,  homes  are  pushed  more  and  more  away  from  the 
seats  of  business,  either  in  urban  or  suburban  localities,  these 
new  means  of  recent  and  quick  conveyance  virtually  bridging 
over  the  distance.  The  same  is  often  true  with  reference  to 
schools  and  churches,  and  other  necessities  of  civilized  and 
Christian  life.  And  hence,  while  all  ordinary  transportation 
should  cease  on  that  day,  the  movement  of  some  cars  may 
be  demanded  by  necessity  and  mercy,  as  involving  far  less  of 
labor  to  discharge  the  necessary  offices  of  life  and  religion 
than  would  result  from  their  stoppage.  They  are  in  the  meth- 
ods of  modern  life,  in  such  places  as  New  York  and  its  suburbs, 
much  in  the  position  of  the  East  and  North  river  ferries.  They 
are  in  place  of  streets,  roads  and  bridges,  because  by  them 
alone  can  multitudes  of  people  now  use  these  roads  in  which 
these  tracks  are  for  purposes  of  necessary  travel.  To  this  it 
is  due  that,  notwithstanding  all  protests  to  the  contrary  from 
ecclesiastical  bodies  in  the  earliest  days  of  the  practice,  milk- 
trains  continue  to  be  run,  as  the  only  means  of  supplying  the 
cities  with  that  indispensable  necessity  of  life,  pure  milk. 
Presbyterian  communicants  and  elders  of  unquestioned  repute 
for  piety,  after  church  on  Sabbath,  carry  the  milk  of  their 
dairies  to  these  trains,  often  for  deliver}'  to  and  consumption 
by  those  other  Presbyterian  people  who  will  use  no  other,  be- 
cause thus  alone  they  judge  that  they  get  a pure  article.  All 
this  neither  justifies  nor  palliates  any  movement  of  railroad 
trains  for  business  purely  secular,  for  excursions  of  pleasure, 
or  for  any  purposes  not  fairly  within  the  domain  of  necessity 
or  mercy.  While  much  that  is  done  on  many  railroads  is  clearly 
not  within  this  description,  there  is  undoubtedly  a considera- 
ble border-land  in  which  opinions  of  persons,  equally  pure  and 
intelligent,  might  honestly  differ,  as  almost  always  happens  in 
casuistry,  or  the  application  of  undisputed  principles,  to  cases  of 
disputed  facts,  or  facts  dubious  in  their  inferential  relations,  if 
not  per  se.  But  still,  a large  residuum  is  left  of  Sunday  work  done 
by  many  railroads,  which  can  be  justified  on  no  plausible  plea  of 
necessity  or  mercy,  and  must,  therefore,  go  to  the  account  of 
Sabbath  desecration,  pure  and  simple.  We  do  not,  then,  regard 

( New  Series,  No.  22.)  25 


550 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


all  the  cases  of  Sunday  railway  travel  referred  to  by  Dr„ 
Bittinger  as  in  point,  because  some  are  not  necessarily  “ Sab- 
bath-breaking” in  their  nature.  But  take  the  case  of  those 
that  are  such  beyond  question.  Their  stock  is  owned  by 
thousands  of  Christians,  including  elders  and  ministers,  and 
held  without  scruple  and  without  question.  And  inasmu  chas 
it  may  be  readily  sold  or  transferred,  can  their  participation  in 
it  be  deemed  less  than  “ voluntary  and  responsible”?  How, 
then,  is  Dr.  Bittinger  and  those  who  agree  with  him,  to  be 
met  when  they  allege  this  fact,  as  pro  tanto,  of  the  same  moraL 
quality  as  issuing  Sunday  newspapers? 

The  venerable  Dr.  McKinney,  a member  of  the  Sewickley 
congregation,  a veteran  ever  “valiant  for  the  truth,”  said  : 

If  the  gentleman  came  before  the  Session  and  said,  “ Though  I am 
a stockholder  of  this  concern,  I don’t  approve  of  the  Sunday  paper  ; 
but  I cannot  control  it,”  that  was  enough  to  satisfy  the  Session,  he 
believed.  He  had  heard  members  of  it  say  so.  That  would  be 
enough  to  satisfy  the  brethren.  He  knew  that,  because  he  was  one  of 
them.  All  that  was  asked  was  for  the  brother  to  say  he  did  not  do 
what  he  could  prevent — the  issue  of  the  paper  on  Sunday.  Just  as 
men  did  who  owned  railroad  shares,  or  stock  in  a gas  company ; when 
they  had  an  opportunity  to  vote  against  working  on  Sunday  they  did  so  ; 
and  when  they  could  elect  officers  they  elected  men  who  were  opposed 
to  running  cars  on  the  Sabbath — all  that  in  them  lay  to  prevent  dese- 
cration ; but  they  didn’t  feel  bound  to  sell  their  stock  ; they  were  not 
personally  engaged  in  it,  or  engaged  in  promoting  it  in  any  way,  but 
in  such  a way  that  they  yielded  to  it,  and  submitted  to  it,  as  they  did  to 
the  Government,  and  the  Sabbath  mail.  He  put  his  letters  in  Satur- 
day and  took  them  out  Monday.  He  was  not  concerned  in  the  way 
they  were  carried.  He  had  written  against  Sunday  mails,  and  voted 
against  them,  and  done  everything  in  his  power  to  prevent  the  opening 
of  the  Post-Office  on  Sunday,  but  he  paid  his  taxes  and  was  a good 
citizen.  All  they  could  ask,  in  the  publication  of  a newspaper,  was, 
“ Hold  your  stock  if  you  so  please,  but,  as  far  as  your  influence  is. 
concerned,  prevent  its  being  published  on  the  Sabbath  day.” 

In  some  cases,  undoubtedly,  the  conscience  would  be 
sufficiently  cleared  by  such  a protest  without  further  steps  to 
get  rid  of  all  participation  in  forbidden,  anti-Scriptural  occupa- 
tions. But  would  it  be  so  in  reference  to  the  gains  of  a 
gambling  or  betting  association,  or  of  a railway  making  its 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


551 


chief  gains  from  conveying  multitudes  to  places  of  drunken- 
ness and  prostitution  on  the  Sabbath?  We  trow  not.  And 
here,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  it  is  often  hard  to  draw  the 
line  within  which  protest  and  opposition  without  withdrawal 
are  sufficient,  beyond  which  they  are  not.  The  cases  also  are 
innumerable  in  which  we  are  to  use  the  food  and  the  con- 
veniences of  life  provided  for  us  without  troubling  ourselves 
with  questions  as  to  what  Sabbath-breaking  or  other  immorali- 
ties may  have  been  implicated  in  their  production  or  procure- 
ment, “asking  no  questions  for  conscience’ sake,”  since,  if  we 
did,  the  ongoings  of  life  would  be  impossible.  We  once  knew  a 
bright  youth  of  morbidly  scrupulous  conscience  who,  for  a 
time,  became  afraid  to  eat  any  but  a few  domestic  esculents, 
in  the  production  of  which  he  felt  sure  that  Sabbath  desecra- 
tion and  slavery  had  no  part.  His  friends  became  anxious  lest 
he  should  be,  in  a similar  way,  set  against  eating  the  few  articles 
which  yet  sustained  life.  It  is  plain  that  such  scrupulosity 
would  render  life  intolerable,  if  not  impossible.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  can  one  well  patronize  a Sunday  newspaper  with- 
out knowing,  encouraging  and  participating  in  whatever  in- 
fraction of  the  Sabbath  its  publication  has  involved  ? Again, 
supposing  all  this  settled,  we  are  not  yet  free  from  questions 
of  perplexing  casuistry  in  the  premises.  Dr.  Edson  of 
Indianapolis  said  during  the  debate,  by  way  of  showing  the 
necessity  of  a caution  and  parsimony  in  the  Assembly’s  de- 
liverances that  would  keep  them  from  being  a network  of  future 
entanglements : 

“ It  would  be  impossible  for  any  one  to  turn  the  General  Assembly 
into  a house  that  favored,  in  any  sort  of  way,  the  desecration  of  the 
Sabbath.  [Applause.]  They  were  unanimous  about  that.  But  this 
was  a most  intricate  and  delicate  question  ; and  the  statement  of  it 
needed  to  be  so  careful,  with  so  little  verbiage,  and  so  little  rhetoric, 
and  so  much  of  Scripture,  and  so  much  of  formal  deliverances  of  the 
Assembly,  that  they  could  stand  upon  it  anywhere.  . . . He  had 

not  heard  that  most  interesting  “ personal  explanation,”  but  it  appeared 
from  that  explanation  that  a gentleman  quite  distinguished  upon  the 
floor  must  either  have  borrowed  or  purchased  a newspaper,  which  he 
(the  speaker)  supposed  had  no  special  reputation  for  piety,  and  pos- 
sibly might  be  called  a Sunday  newspaper ; and  any  voluntary  partici- 
pation in  the  publishing  or  reading  of  such  a paper,  he  supposed,  ought 


552 


The  General  Assembly.  [July? 

not  to  be  encouraged  there.  [Applause.]  He  wished  to  know  if 
they  were  going  to  discipline  a member  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
who  worked  all  day  Saturday  and  sold  his  newspaper  on  Sunday,  and 
let  that  brother  go  scot  free  who  worked  all  day  Sunday  and  sold  his 
paper  on  Monday  ? [Applause.]  He  believed  in  putting  the  Sunday 
question  squarely  and  fairly — opposing  all  desecration  of  the  day — so 
that  it  would  accord  with  the  standards,  the  deliverances  of  the  Assem- 
bly and  the  Scriptures.” 

Dr.  Briggs  of  Union  Seminary  believed 

“ That  the  publication  of  a Sabbath  newspaper  was  unscriptural,  but 
he  was  opposed  to  such  an  extreme  measure  as  that  contemplated  by 
the  resolutions,  even  as  amended  by  the  insertion  of  the  word  “ respon- 
•sible.”  There  were  numerous  questions  of  casuistry  which  must  be  left 
to  the  churches  themselves,  and  which  the  Presbyteries,  Synods  and 
General  Assemblies  should  not  have  brought  before  them,  for  if  so,  the 
work  would  be  endless.” 

If  the  case  of  those  who  labor  through  the  Sabbath  to  prepare 
a Monday  morning’s  newspaper,  which  church-members  take 
without  scruple,  become  none  the  less  perplexing  in  view  of  the 
present  action  of  the  Assembly,  what  ought  to  be  done  with 
those  who,  in  order  to  give  their  employes  the  rest  of  the 
Sabbath,  issue  their  daily  paper  on  Sunday  but  not  on  Mon- 
day mornings?  Such  a paper,  a friend  informs  us,  is  published 
at  Montgomery,  Ga.  It  is  evident  that  the  strongest  stand 
possible  should  be  taken  in  arrest  of  the  increasing  desecra- 
tion and  relaxed  observance  of  the  Sabbath.  But  much  close 
thinking  is  required  in  order  to  formulate  deliverances  which 
will  stand  so  that  they  can  be  carried  out  in  every  exigency  to 
which  the  principles  of  law  they  lay  down  will  apply.  And  to 
enunciate  such  as,  through  incautious  or  inadequate  state- 
ment, are  in  the  end  self-destroying,  hurts  more  than  it  helps 
the  cause  they  are  designed  to  promote.  We  do  not  intend 
to  intimate  that  the  Assembly’s  deliverance  could  be  improved, 
but  we  think  it  wise  to  look  clearly  at  the  possible  cases  to 
which  it  may  apply,  and  see  whether  it  requires  any  additions. 

Fraternal  Relations  with  the  Church,  South. 

The  following  communication  was  received  from  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States, 
now  in  session  at  New  Orleans,  La. : 


i877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


553 


New  Orleans,  May  22,  1877. — The  Committee  of  Correspondence 
recommend  to  the  General  Assembly  the  following  as  our  Church’s 
reply  to  the  communication  received  at  this  session  from  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America  : 
Whereas,  The  General  Assembly  of  this  Church,  in  session  at  St. 
Louis  in  1875,  adopted  a paper  rendering  “ special  thanks,  in  the 
name  of  the  whole  church,  to  our  Committee  of  Conference  at  Balti- 
more for  their  diligence,  fidelity  and  Christian  prudence,”  and  in 
particular  approving  and  indorsing  “ as  satisfactory  to  the  Southern 
Church  the  condition  precedent  to  fraternal  relations  suggested  by  our 
Committee,”  viz.  : “If  your  Assembly  could  see  its  way  clear  to  say 
in  a few  brief  words  to  this  effect,  that  these  obnoxious  things  were 
said  and  done  in  times  of  great  excitement,  and  are  to  be  regretted, 
and  that  now,  on  a calm  review,  the  imputations  cast  upon  the  Southern 
Church  [of  schism,  heresy  and  blasphemy]  are  disapproved,  that 
would  end  the  difficulty  at  once”  ; and, 

Whereas,  Our  General  Assembly,  in  session  at  Savannah  in  1876, 
in  response  to  a paper  from  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  in  the  United  States  of  America,  which  met  in  Brooklyn, 
adopted  the  following  paper,  viz. : 

“ We  are  ready  most  cordially  to  enter  on  fraternal  relations  with 
your  body  on  ary  terms  honorable  to  both  parties.  This  Assembly 
has  already,  in  answer  to  an  overture  from  our  Presbytery  of  St.  Louis 
spontaneously  taken  the  following  action  : 

“ Resolved,  That  the  action  of  the  Baltimore  Conference,  approved 
by  the  Assembly  at  St.  Louis,  explains  with  sufficient  clearness  the  posi- 
tion of  your  Church.  But  inasmuch  as  it  is  represented  by  the  overture 
that  misapprehension  exists  in  the  minds  of  some  of  our  people  as  to 
the  spirit  of  this  action,  in  order  to  show  our  disposition  to  remove  on 
our  part  all  real  or  seeming  hindrance  to  friendly  feeling,  the  Assembly 
explicitly  declares  that,  while  condemning  certain  acts  and  deliverances 
of  the  Northern  General  Assembly,  no  acts  or  deliverances  of  the 
Southern  General  Assemblies  are  to  be  construed  or  admitted  as  im- 
pugning in  any  way  the  Christian  character  of  the  Northern  General 
Assembly,  or  of  the  historical  bodies  of  which  it  is  the  successor”  ; 
and, 

Whereas,  The  said  General  Assembly  at  Brooklyn,  in  response  to 
the  foregoing  paper  of  our  Assembly  at  Savannah,  adopted  the  follow- 
ing, which  has  been  communicated  to  us  at  our  present  meeting,  viz.  : 
“ The  overture  of  this  Assembly  having  been  received  by  the  General 
Assembly  in  the  South  with  such  a cordial  expression  of  gratification, 
the  Committee  recommend  that  the  same  resolution,  declarative  of  the 


554 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


spirit  in  which  this  action  is  taken,  be  adopted  by  this  Assembly,  viz.  : 

‘ In  order  to  show  our  disposition  to  remove  on  our  part  all  real  or 
seeming  hindrance  to  friendly  feeling,  the  Assembly  explicitly  declares 
that,  while  condemning  certain  acts  and  deliverances  of  the  Southern 
General  Assembly,  no  acts  or  deliverances  of  the  Northern  Assembly, 
or  of  the  historic  bodies  of  which  the  present  Assembly  is  the  suc- 
cessor, are  to  be  construed  or  admitted  as  impugning  in  any  way  the 
Christian  character  of  the  Southern  General  Assembly,  or  of  the 
historic  body  or  bodies  of  which  it  is  the  successor,’  now,  therefore, 
be  it 

Resolved , By  this  Assembly,  that  we  cannot  regard  this  communica- 
tion as  satisfactory,  because  we  can  discover  in  it  no  reference  whatever 
to  the  first  and  main  part  of  the  paper  adopted  by  our  Assembly  at 
Savannah  and  communicated  to  the  Brooklyn  Assembly.  This  Assem- 
bly can  add  nothing  on  this  subject  to  the  action  of  the  Assembly  at 
St.  Louis  adopting  the  basis  proposed  by  our  Committee  of  Conference 
at  Baltimore  and  reaffirmed  by  the  Assembly  at  Savannah. 

If  our  brethren  of  the  Northern  Church  can  meet  us  on  these  terms, 
which  truth  and  righteousness  seem  to  us  to  require,  then  we  are  ready 
to  establish  such  relations  with  them  during  the  present  sessions  of  the 
Assemblies. 

Adopted  in  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States,  in  session  at  New  Orleans,  La.,  May  22,  1877. 

C.  A.  Stillman,  Moderator. 

Joseph  R.  Wilson,  Stated  Clerk. 

William  Brown,  Permanent  Clerk. 

To  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United 

States  of  America,  in  session  at  Chicago,  111. 

This  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Correspondence, 
which  reported  through  its  chairman,  Dr.  Marquis,  in  favor  of 
the  Assembly’s  passing  resolutions  expressing  regret  that  the 
terms  “ heresy,”  “schism”  and  “blasphemy”  had  ever  been 
applied  to  any  proceedings  or  declarations  of  the  Southern 
Church  or  Assembly  by  any  body  to  which  this  Assembly  is 
the  successor.  After  long  debate,  this  recommendation  was 
rejected  by  the  Assembly,  which,  by  a large  majority,  adopted 
the  following  substitute  : 

Whereas,  The  General  Assemblies  of  1870  and  1873  have  solemnly 
decreed  that  all  the  deliverances  of  the  General  Assemblies  during  the 
late  war,  so  far  as  they  impeach  the  Christian  character  and  doctrinal 
soundness  of  the  body  known  as  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Church, 
are  null  and  void  ; and 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


555 


Whereas,  Our  last  General  Assembly,  reiterating  the  action  of  former 
Assemblies,  declared  our  confidence  in  the  Christian  character  and  doc- 
trinal soundness  of  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Church,  and  our  desire 
to  enter  into  fraternal  correspondence  with  them  upon  terms  of  perfect 
equality  and  reciprocity,  and  cordially  invited  the  Southern  Assembly 
to  send  a corresponding  delegate  to  this  Assembly ; therefore, 

Resolved,  That  while  we  are  sincerely  desirous  to  be  reunited  in 
closer  relations  with  the  brethren  from  whom  we  have  been  separated, 
we  do  not  deem  it  expedient  at  present  to  take  any  further  action  upon 
the  subject  except  to  repeat  the  declaration  of  the  last  Assembly,  that 
we  are  ready  cordially  to  receive  a representative  from  the  Southern 
Church,  and  to  send  a delegate  to  their  Assembly  whenever  they  may 
intimate  a willingness  to  enter  into  fraternal  relations  upon  such  terms. 
But  while  this  General  Assembly  is  ready  at  any  time  to  enter  into  fra- 
ternal relations  with  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  the  United  States,  no  further  action  in  this  matter  on  the  part  of  this 
Assembly  is  called  for  at  present. 

The  arguments  which  prevailed  to  lead  the  Assembly  to 
this  issue,  forcibly  presented  by  Drs.  Van  Dyke,  Edson  and 
others,  were  substantially  that,  having  already  declared  the 
action  complained  of  by  the  Southern  Assembly  null  and 
void,  it  was  going  quite  beyond  our  legitimate  province  to  ex- 
press regret  or  repentance  for  the  doings  of  former  Assemblies 
of  churches  now  having  no  distinct,  continued  existence,  and 
most  of  whose  actors  were  no  longer  on  the  stage  to  speak  for 
themselves  ; that  fraternal  relations  would  come  much  sooner 
by  quietly  waiting  till  things  ripen  for  it  than  by  attempting 
prematurely  to  force  it  while  it  yet  remains  unwelcome  to  our 
Southern  brethren  ; and,  above  all,  that  to  establish  fraternal 
relations  by  humiliating  confessions  on  our  side,  with  no  cor- 
responding concessions  on  the  other,  was  to  betray  moral 
and  historical  truth  ; to  proclaim  to  the  world  by  the  most 
solemn  acts  possible  that  while  we  were  at  fault  in  the  utter- 
ances of  former  Assemblies  with  respect  to  the  Church  South, 
they  were  no  way  at  fault  when  they  declared  it  the  “mission 
of  the  Church  to  conserve  slavery,”  and  thus  provoked  the 
severe  denunciation  of  which  they  complain ; when  they  pro- 
nounced our  Assembly  a “ prevaricating  witness”  ; when  they 
met  our  first  courteous  advances  to  them  proposing  fraternal 
correspondence  with  the  following  salutation,  containing 
charges  about  as  grave  as  could  well  be  brought  against  any 
body  pretending  to  be  a Christian  Church  : 


556 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July 


“i.  Both  the  wings  of  the  now  united  Assembly,  during  their  separate 
existence  before  the  fusion,  did  fatally  complicate  themselves  with  the 
State  in  political  utterances  deliberately  uttered  year  after  year;  and 
which  in  our  judgment  were  a sad  betrayal  of  the  cause  and  kingdom 
of  our  common  Lord  and  Head.  We  believe  it  to  be  solely  incumbent 
upon  the  Northern  Presbyterian  Church,  not  with  reference  to  us,  but 
before  the  Christian  world,  and  before  our  Divine  Master  and  King, 
to  purge  itself  of  this  error,  and  by  public  proclamation  of  the  truth  to 
place  the  crown  once  more  upon  the  head  of  Jesus  Christ  as  the  alone 
King  of  Zion.  In  default  of  which  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Church, 
which  has  already  suffered  much  in  maintaining  the  independence  and 
spirituality  of  the  Redeemer’s  kingdom  upon  earth,  feels  constrained  to 
bear  public  testimony  against  this  defection  of  our  late  associates  in 
the  truth.  Nor  can  we,  by  official  correspondence  even,  consent  to 
blunt  the  edge  of  this  our  testimony  concerning  the  very  nature  and 
mission  of  the  Church  as  a purely  spiritual  body  among  men. 

“2.  The  union  now  consummated  between  the  Old  and  New  Assem- 
blies, North,  was  accomplished  by  methods  which,  in  our  judgment, 
involved  a total  surrender  of  all  the  great  testimonies  of  the  Church  for 
the  fundamental  doctrines  of  grace,  and  at  a time  when  the  victory  of 
truth  and  error  hung  long  in  the  balance.  The  United  Assembly 
stands  of  necessity  upon  an  allowed  latitude  of  interpretation  of  the 
standards,  and  must  come  at  length  to  embrace  nearly  all  shades  of 
doctrinal  belief.  Of  those  falling  testimonies  we  are  the  sole  surviving 
heirs,  which  we  must  lift  from  the  dust  and  bear  to  the  generations 
after  us.  It  would  be  a serious  compromise  of  this  sacred  trust  to  enter 
into  public  and  official  fellowship  with  tho:e  repudiating  those  testi- 
monies ; and  to  do  this  expressly  upon  the  ground,  as  stated  in  the 
preamble  to  the  overture  before  us,  ‘ that  the  terms  of  reunion 
between  the  two  branches  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  at  the  North, 
now  happily  consummated,  present  an  auspicious  opportunity  tor  the 
adjustment  of  such  relations.’  To  found  a correspondence  professedly 
uponthisidea  would  be  toindorse  that  which  we  thoroughly  disapprove.” 

No  special  pleading  can  take  out  the  offensiveness  of  such 
charges  which  were  wrought  up  in  individual  speeches,  even  to 
the  length  of  insisting  that  we  were  “ chained  to  Caesar’s  car.” 
To  make  retractions  and  confessions  ourselves  while  we  require 
no  withdrawal  of,  or  regret  for,  such  charges  against  ourselves, 
made  by'  those  to  whom  we  tender  our  confessions,  is  virtually 
to  admit  their  truth ; an  admission  which  our  Southern 
brethren  would  be  the  last  to  respect,  or  to  judge  a good 
ground  for  establishing  fraternal  relations. 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


55  7 


The  fact  remains  that  there  can  be  no  restoration  of  fraternal 
relations  while  humiliating  conditions  are  demanded  on  either 
side,  or  any  basis  but  that  of  perfect  equality  and  reciprocity. 
And  we  see  no  reason  to  change  the  opinion  we  have  enter- 
tained since  the  rough  repulse  of  our  advances  in  1870,  that 
the  surest  and  shortest  way  to  them  is  to  remain  quiet,  and 
wait  till  some  sign  is  given  that  our  Southern  brethren  are 
ready  to  enter  upon  these  relations  on  terms  of  mutual  equality 
and  reciprocity.  Such  appears  to  have  been  the  judgment  of 
the  Assembly. 

Communion  Wine — Temperance. 

We  regret  to  observe  that  an  effort  was  made  to  commit 
the  Assembly  to  the  recommendation  of  the  unfermented  juice 
of  the  grape  as  the  only  drink  fit  for  the  communion.  We  da 
not  see  how  such  a movement  can  inure  to  the  benefit  of  re- 
ligion or  temperance.  We  are  very  confident  that  it  will  be  to 
the  advantage  of  both  not  to  complicate  them  with  any  princi- 
ple having  so  slender  a scriptural  basis,  or  likely  to  gain  so  few 
adherents  as  the  doctrine  in  question.  We  are  glad  the  As- 
sembly disposed  of  the  matter  by  making  the  following  wise 
deliverance : 

That  the  control  of  this  matter  be  left  to  the  Sessions  of  the  several 
churches,  with  the  earnest  recommendation  that  the  purest  wine  attain- 
able be  used. 

By  other  action  the  Assembly  happily  cast  its  whole  influence 
in  favor  of  the  great  temperance  movement  now  in  progress,  and 
appointed  delegates  to  the  convention  of  representatives  from 
Christian  churches  in  furtherance  of  this  cause,  soon  to  be 
held.  We  trust  that  this  convention  will  not  fall  under  the 
lead  of  extremists  who  will  repel  the  co-operation  of  earnest 
temperance  men  by  a platform  of  fanatical  extravagance  on 
the  one  hand,  or  of  those  lukewarm  supporters  whose  help 
consists  more  in  applying  brakes  than  in  clearing  the  track. 

The  McCune  Case 

came  before  the  Assembly  on  no  less  than  seven  appeals  and 
complaints.  This  number  itself  was  appalling,  and  enough  to 
tempt  a body  of  six  hundred  men,  preoccupied  with  other  bus- 
iness quite  sufficient  to  tax  them  to  the  utmost  during  the 
brief  fortnight  of  their  session,  to  shrink  from  undertaking  to 
grapple  with  them.  With  the  number  now  constituting  the 


358 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


Assembly,  and  in  the  absence  of  any  regular  judicial  commis. 
sion,  it  is  almost  a matter  of  course  that  all  judicial  business 
which  is  not  deemed  of  absolute  necessity,  or  which  is  not  sup- 
posed to  involve  some  point  of  doctrine  or  order  that  widely 
stirs  the  church,  should  be  switched  off  on  some  ground,  tech- 
nical or  substantial.  And  a judicial  committee  is  deemed  ex- 
pert and  efficient  which  succeeds  in  so  disposing  of  matters  be- 
fore it  as  to  consume  the  minimum  of  the  Assembly’s  time. 
In  regard  to  seven  separate  appeals  or  complaints,  all  virtually 
belonging  to  one  controversy  or  issue,  it  was  a forgone  conclu- 
sion, therefore,  that  they  should  all,  or  nearly  all,  be  dismissed 
■or  remanded  to  other  tribunals.  Such  was  the  result  in  this 
■case.  They  were  all  disposed  of  without  actual  trial  by  the 
Assembly ; the  reasons  assigned,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  being 
*n  some  cases  sufficient,  in  others  of  questionable  validity. 

On  these  cases  the  Judicial  Committee  reported  as  follows, 
and  the  Assembly  adopted  the  report : 

Judicial  Case  No.  5. — In  the  case  of  the  appeal  of  Thomas  H.  Skin- 
ner and  others  from  the  Presbytery  of  Cincinnati,  the  Committee 
recommend  that,  inasmuch  as  the  so-called  appellants  were  not  an  origi- 
nal party,  they  were  not  entitled  to  an  appeal  (Book  of  Discipline, 
Chapter  vii.,  Sections  3,  17),  and  that,  therefore,  the  case  be  dismissed. 

Judicial  Cases  Nos.  6,  7,  8,  and  9. — In  the  case  of  the  complaints 
of  ( 1)  Nathaniel  West  and  Thomas  H.  Skinner  against  the  Presbytery 
of  Cincinnati,  for  alleged  judgment  against  the  said  West;  (2)  the  same 
against  the  same,  for  adopting  a resolution  of  its  Judicial  Committee; 
(3)  E.  D.  Ledyard  and  others  against  the  same,  for  the  same  proceed- 
ing ; (4)  Thomas  H.  Skinner  and  others  against  the  same,  for  not  sus- 
taining the  charges  against  Rev.  W.  C.  McCune,  the  Committee 
recommend  that,  as  the  reasons  for  direct  complaint  to  the  General  As- 
sembly as  presented  to  the  Committee,  and  in  their  hands,  are  deemed 
insufficient,  and  as  the  constitutional  jurisdiction  and  rights  of  the  Synod 
over  its  lower  courts  are  to  be  sacredly  respected,  therefore  these  sev- 
eral complaints  be  referred  to  the  Synod  of  Cincinnati. 

Judicial  Case  No.  10. — In  the  case  of  the  complaint  of  Nathaniel 
West  and  Thomas  H.  Skinner  against  the  Synod  of  Cincinnati,  in  a case 
of  review  and  control,  the  Committee  recommend  that,  it  being  a ques- 
tion of  mere  review  of  records,  a judicial  complaint  does  not  lie,  and 
that  the  case  be  dismissed. 

Judicial  Case  No.  11. — In  the  case  of  Thomas  H.  Skinner  and 
others  against  the  Synod  of  Cincinnati,  for  not  taking  up  and  issuing  a 
complaint  of  Dr.  Skinner  against  the  Presbytery  of  Cincinnati  in  the 


1877-] 


The  General  Assembly. 


559 


McCuna  case,  then  pending,  the  Committee  recommend  that,  as  there 
had  been  no  judicial  action  of  the  Synod  in  the  case  against  which  a 
complaint  could  lie,  but  simply  and  only  a postponement  of  action  on 
a report  of  the  Judicial  Committee  of  the  Synod,  therefore  the  case  be 
dismissed. 

To  this  along  protest,  too  long  for  insertion  here,  was  offered 
by  several  members,  and  received  to  record.  So  far  as  we  are 
advised,  no  answer  was  made  to  it.  That  brings  to  view  the 
ground  of  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  appellants  and  complainants 
with  these  several  findings  of  the  Assembly,  and  with  its  gen- 
eral attitude  in  thus  ruling  out  the  whole  subject. 

In  regard  to  No.  5,  they  protest  that  by  the  term  “original 
party”  in  our  constitution  is  not  meant  merely  a party  to  a 
strictly  judicial  trial,  but  a “party  aggrieved”  by  any  judgment 
of  the  Assembly,  whether  judicial  or  non-judicial.  We  cannot 
agree  with  the  position  either  of  the  Assembly’s  minute  or  of 
the  protest. 

We  think  that  the  whole  3rd  section  of  Chapter  vii — in  the 
Book  of  Discipline  implies  that  the  “original  parties”  were  each 
and  all  of  the  parties  litigant,  and  that  this  follows  alike  from 
the  interior  reason  of  the  case,  and  from  any  consistent  con- 
struction of  the  different  parts  of  the  section.  A public  prose- 
cutor may  certainly  be  “aggrieved”  by  the  manner  in  which 
the  judicatory  has  treated  him  and  the  cause  4 which  he  repre- 
sents, and  because  in  his  judgment  and  those  who  agree  with 
him,  if  there  be  no  redress  by  appeal,  “justice  is  fallen  in  the 
streets  and  equity  cannot  enter.”  One  may  suffer  as  much  from 
a “lost  cause,”  and  more  from  what  he  deems  the  defeat  of  vital 
truths  of  religion,  than  from  any  mere  personal  injury  ; he  may 
suffer  as  a member  of  Christ,  wounded  in  the  house  of  his 
friends.  Moreover,  the  reasons  for  an  appeal  assigned  (Sec. 
3)  with  a single  exception,  may  pertain  as  much  to  the  prose- 
cutor, even  if  he  be  a public  prosecutor,  as  to  the  accused. 
The  language  of  the  book  always  speaks  of  “original  parties” 
as  plural,  not  single.  “The  original  parties  and  all  the  mem- 
bers of  the  inferior  judicatory  shall  withdraw.” — Id.  9.  All  this 
reasoning  applies  in  full  force  to  a committee  of  prosecution 
appointed  by  the  judicatory  in  a case  in  which  common  fame 
is  the  accuser.  Such  a committee  has  been  expressly  declared 
one  of  the  original  parties  in  a case  involving  that  question 
before  the  O.  S.  Assembly,  as  the  protest  shows  by  a reference 


560 


The  General  Assembly. 


[July, 


to  Moore  s Digest,  p.  563.  Suppose  a Presbytery,  through  preju- 
dice or  other  perverting  influence,  utterly  unfaithful  or  incom- 
petent in  its  treatment  of  the  committee  of  prosecution,  their 
witnesses,  proof  and  arguments,  who  are  so  well  fitted  as  they 
to  present  their  case  in  its  strength  to  a higher  tribunal? 

The  legal  maxim  nemo  bis  vexari  dcbet , applies  no  more  here 
than  in  any  possible  case  of  appeal,  civil  or  ecclesiastical.  An 
appeal  does  not  repeat  a trial  otherwise  complete.  It  ren- 
ders it  incomplete  till  perfected  by  a higher  judicatory.  Nor 
does  the  right  of  complaint  furnish  an  adequate  remedy  in 
case  of  improper  acquittal  by  the  lower  court  upon  the  charge 
of  heresy.  For,  although  it  may  condemn  the  error,  it  leaves 
the  errorist  in  unimpeached  standing  and  free  to  propagate  his 
errors,  however  fatal,  as  a minister  of  the  Church. 

But,  then,  as  to  other  persons  than  the  original  parties  litigant 
having  the  right  of  appeal,  such  in  our  view  is  not  the  mean- 
ing of  our  book,  either  express  or  by  implication,  or  according 
to  the  drift  of  judicial  decisions. — Moore's  Digest,  p.  592.  A 
complaint  to  a higher  court  is  the  proper  relief  for  all  other 
aggrieved  parties.  Article  2 of  Section  in,  Chap.  7,  on 
which,  as  compared  with  Art.  1,  so  much  stress  is  laid,  we  think 
is  merely  designed  to  put  it  beyond  all  doubt  or  peradventure 
that  a defeated,  and  especially  a convicted,  party  can  always 
appeal,  no  matter  who  or  what  may  be  arrayed  against  the 
exercise  of  the  privilege.  The  cases  brought  directly  from 
Presbytery  to  the  General  Assembly,  and  by  the  Assembly  re- 
ferred back  to  Synod,  were  dealt  with  in  accordance  with  the 
prevailing  usage,  from  which  the  Assembly  never  departs,  un- 
less in  extreme  and  exceptional  cases,  and  for  most  stringent 
reasons.  The  reasons  for  any  deviation  from  this  usage  should 
be  at  least,  prima  facie,  strong  and  irresistible.  But  of  their 
urgency  the  Assembly,  in  its  wise  discretion,  must  be  the  judge. 
We  see  no  evidence  that  in  this  case  it  is  obnoxious  to  just 
censure  for  such  exercise  of  its  judicial  prerogative. 

The  dismissal  of  the  complaint  against  the  Synod  of  Cincin- 
nati for  the  improper  exercise  of  its  power  of  review  and  con- 
trol in  its  dealings  with  the  records  of  the  Presbytery  of 
Cincinnati  may  have  been  right  or  wrong  in  view  of  the  facts 
of  the  case.  But  from  the  exceptions  taken  by  the  Assembly 
to  those  records,  there  seems  to  have  been  at  least  prima  facie 
ground  of  complaint.  The  reason  assigned  strikes  us  as  inade- 


1 877.]  The  General  Assembly.  561 

quate,  viz.,  that  “ being  a question  of  mere  review  of  records, 
a judicial  complaint  does  not  lie.”  If  these  records  are 
records  of  a judicial  proceeding  by  a lower  court  serving 
under  the  review  of  a higher,  the  approval  or  disapproval  of 
them  may  be,  in  substance  and  effect,  a judicial  act,  and  if  de- 
cidedly wrong,  a just  subject  of  complaint  to,  and  call  for  re- 
vision by,  a higher  court.  Moreover,  in  the  actual  practice  of 
the  Assembly,  the  “decision  by  an  inferior  judicatory,  which  in 
the  opinion  of  the  complainants  has  been  irregularly  and  un- 
justly made,”  has  been  taken  in  its  broadest  sense  to  mean 
not  only  “judicial,”  but  any  “decision”  which,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  complainants,  is  “ irregularly  and  unjustly  made.” 
The  questions  thus  brought  up  and  issued  by  the  Assem- 
bly on  complaint  are  such  as  the  propriety  of  one  man 
being  simultaneously  elder  in  two  churches;  the  mode  of 
electing  certain  ruling  elders ; against  a reference  of  a case  to 
a.  higher  court  by  a Presbytery  ; against  a Synod  for  dissolving  a 
Presbytery,  etc.,  etc.  Indeed,  it  does  not  appear  how  great 
wrongs  by  inferior  judicatories  can,  in  many  cases,  be  presented 
to  the  higher  courts  for  correction,  if  complaints  must  be  con- 
fined to  strictly  judicial  action,  or  if  judicial  records  cannot  be 
made  a matter  of  “ judicial  complaint.”  Suppose  these  records 
omit  the  vital  elements  in  a case  ; what  then  ? 

Into  the  original  merits  of  the  case  as  a whole,  to  which  the 
above  mentioned  acts  refer,  we  have  neither  time  nor  space  to 
go.  Even  the  matter  of  the  complaints  and  appeals  above  re- 
ferred to  is  not  before  us.  We  have  touched  only  the  reasons 
which  the  record  presents  for  the  Assembly’s  manner  of  dealing 
with  them,  and  some  of  the  objections  of  the  protestants. 

As  all  such  decisions,  or  the  expressed  reasons  for  them,  by 
the  Assembly,  tend  to  acquire  authority  and  harden  into  pre- 
cedents, especially  when  they  pass  unquestioned,  we  have 
deemed  it  worth  while  to  discuss,  not  the  clecisions  them- 
selves, of  the  justice  of  which  we  have  no  means  of  judg- 
ing, because  we  have  no  adequate  authoritative  knowledge  of 
the  facts,  but  the  sufficiency  of  the  reasons  assigned  for 
them.  The  literature  of  the  case  has  already  become  so 
enormous  as  to  be  extremely  difficult  to  collect  and  digest. 
Mr.  McCune  is  now  out  of  our  Church,  and  we  can  hardly  be- 
lieve that  a case  that  has  issued  in  making  our  communion  too 
uncomfortable  for  him  and  such  as  he,  will  afford  permanent 


562  The  General  Assembly.  [J  ulyr 

encouragement  to  future  impugners  of  any  part  of  our  order 
within  our  Church. 

We  think  Mr.  McCune  has  abundantly  shown  that  “ he  went 
out  from  us  because  he  was  not  of  us.”  As  so  often  occurs  in 
such  cases,  he  turns  against  his  protectors.  His  doctrine  that 
no  Christian  Church  has  a right  to  maintain  or  make  a condi- 
tion of  ministerial  standing  anything  but  that  minimum  of  truth 
which  is  left  after  excluding  what  is  peculiar  to  each  Chris- 
tian denomination,  cannot  be  carried  out  without  starting  one 
more  new  sect  and  distracting  existing  churches.  As  a Pres- 
byterian minister  he  undertook,  without  sanction  of  his  Pres, 
bytery,  to  form  a church  which,  in  its  very  constitution,  was  a 
constant  witness  against  Presbyterianism.  What  but  confusion 
and  disorder  could  ensue?  His  scheme  is  a chimera  which 
cannot  be  realized  this  side  the  millennial  or  heavenly  church,, 
in  which  all  see  eye  to  eye,  and  know  even  as  they  are  known. 
As  long  as  we  know  only  in  part,  different  Christian  denomi- 
nations are  a necessity. 

Any  criticism  of  the  proceedings  of  the  various  parties 
judicial  and  litigant  in  this  case  would  now  be  unprofitable 
and  superfluous.  The  case  seems  to  have  been  complicated  by 
more  or  less  mistakes  and  indiscretions,  which  tended  to  pro- 
tract it.  But  we  do  not  think  the  experiment  out  of  which  it 
all  grew  is  likely  often  to  be  repeated  by  ministers  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church. 

We  think  that  on  these  matters  our  Church  will  hold  no  un- 
certain attitude,  and  that  whatever  else  may  be  true,  the  ‘‘ra- 
tionalism and  liberalism”  which  the  last  number  of  the  South- 
ern Presbyterian  Review  charges  us  with  harboring,  can  be  founds 
if  at  all,  only  in  homeopathic  drops  of  the  millionth  dilution." 

Other  great  subjects  occupied  the  Assembly  which  we  have 
no  space  to  note.  The  questions  of  Chinese  and  German 
evangelization,  of  Sustentation,  and  other  problems  in  the 
Home  and  Foreign  Field,  Education,  and  much  more,  were 

vigorously  grappled  and,  in  general,  wisely  concluded. 

L.  H.  A. 

* We  have  received,  at  the  last  moment,  The  Process,  Testimony  and  Opening 
Argument  of  the  Prosecution , Note  and  Final  Minutes  of  the  Judicial  Trial  of  Rev. 
IV.  C.  McCune , by  the  Presbytery  of  Cincinnati,  from  March  6 to  March  27,  eSyj- 
A well-printed  pamphlet  of  1 So  pages,  in  which  the  substantial  elements  in  the 
case,  with  the  views  of  the  Prosecution  and  the  Court,  are  fully  exhibited.  It  will 
be  found  convenient  for  reference.  Cincinnati : Robt.  Clark  & Co. 


1877-1 


Contemporary  Literature. 


563 


Art.  X.— CONTEMPORARY  LITERATURE. 

Theology. 

Macmillan  & Co.  publish  the  second  edition  of  Salvation  Here  and  Here- 
after, sermons  and  essays,  by  Rev.  John  Service,  an  English  clergyman. 
This  volume  is  a vigorous  and  plausible  expansion  of  the  author’s  paraphrase  of 
Pope’s  famous  couplet  in  the  following  terms  : “ For  modes  of  faith  it  is  ob- 
vious to  common  sense  that  senseless  bigots  fight,  and  they  alone,”  p.  154. 
All  theological  tenets,  creeds,  doctrinal  positions  are  his  abhorrence.  Moral 
purity  and  uprightness  of  life,  independently  of  all  those  evangelical  and 
supernatural  truths  which  form  the  groundwork  of  Christian  salvation  and 
true  holiness,  are  wholly  irrelative  to  the  author’s  view  of  “ salvation  here  and 
hereafter  nay,  worse,  they  are  scouted  as  if  they  were  the  dregs  of  an 
obsol^e  and  pestilent  dogmatism.  The  author  is  as  Broad  Church  as  it  is 
possible  to  be  without  repudiating  the  very  name  and  pretence  of  Christianity. 
Of  future  perdition,  limited  or  unlimited  in  duration,  he  recognizes  none 
except  that  of  continuance  in  an  immoral  or  depraved  state.  The  highest 
salvation  here  and  hereafter  is  that  of  self-sacrifice  prompted  by  love.  The 
revelation  of  anything  in  the  Bible,  beyond  the  intuitive  truths  of  morality 
or  natural  religion,  is  denied  by  the  author.  He  says: 

“ This  was  the  way  in  which  it  was  felt  that  Christ  had  authority  : He  ignored 
in  his  teachings  those  things  for  which  authority  was  required ; he  insisted  upon 
those  things  that  speak  for  themselves,  and  carry  authority  along  with  them.  These 
were — these  are — the  great  principles,  goodness,  morality,  or  whatever  you  like  to 
call  the  nobler  way  of  life.  When  it  is  day  no  man  needs  to  go  about  saying,  ‘ It  is 
not  night,  it  is  not  night.’  No  more  when  it  is  said,  ‘ Blessed  are  the  good,’  do  you 
need  to  prove  that  it  is  quite  true.  Preachers  who  preach  a system  of  theology 
need  to  appeal  to  authority.  They  are  impressive,  if  at  all,  not  from  what  they  say, 
but  from  the  authority  they  claim  for  saying  it.  It  is  different  with  preachers  and 
teachers  of  religion — with  those  whom  God  ordains  to  prophecy,  line  upon  line, 
precept  upon  precept,  that  to  love  God  and  man  is  all  the  law  and  the  prophets. 
They  don’t  need  authority  to  recommend  their  word.  There  is  authority  in  it.  It 
matters  not  who  said  it  first  or  who  says  it  last,  because  it  is  the  truth.” — Pp.  106-7. 

“Be  pure,  be  true,  be  just,  be  generous,  be  magnanimous,  be  unselfish  and  un- 
worldly. This  is  the  sum  and  substance  of  what  Christ  says.  In  a word,  it  is  mor- 
ality, of  course,  the  highest  and  purest,  and  connected  with  faith  in  God  as  the 
Father  and  Saviour  of  all,  but  still  it  is  morality.  Blessed  are  the  good.  Cursed 
are  the  evil.  This  is  what  all  Christ’s  sayings  here,  his  blessings  and  his  reproofs, 
and  his  exhortations,  amount  to.  Not  a word  about  justification  by  faith,  or  the 
doctrine  of  atonement,  or  church-membership,  or  conversion  in  a moment,  or  a death- 
bed repentance,  or  any  one  of  all  those  things  of  which,  as  concerning  salvation,  we 
hear  so  much.  Not  a word  about  these  things.” — P.  104. 

This,  although  said  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  is  given  as  the  representative 
characteristic  of  Christ’s  teachings  universally. 

So,  denying  that  view  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible  which  holds  that  “ it 
was  directed  by  God  just  as  it  was  written,”  he  finds  the  only  inspiration 
it  contains  in  its  unequalled  exhibition  of  the  “highest  wisdom  and  noblest 
humanity.”  No  wonder  that  such  a writer  makes  some  exceptional  hypocrites 
typical  of  the  whole  class  of  people  who  obey  the  Bible  in  all  its  parts  as  the 


5^4 


Contemporary  Literature. 


[July, 


•word  of  God,  and  not  merely  in  its  self-evident  moral  axioms ; and  that  he 
also  makes  them  the  occasion  for  a monstrous  caricature  of  those  Christians  who 
keep  their  allegiance  to  the  word  and  church  of  God  as  supernatural  and  divine. 
It  is  quite  consistent  for  such  a man  to  say  of  them,  “ Their  goodness  is  churchy, 
not  human  or  divine.  They  hold  a man  in  greater  detestation  for  heresy  than  for 
villany,  for  a theological  opinion  which  is  supposed  to  be  wrong  than  for  a life  in 
which  there  is  nothing  right.  They  subscribe  to  heathen  missions,  neglect  their 
poor  relations,  and  are  unmannerly  with  their  neighbors.  They  make  money  by 
tricks  of  trade,  build  churches  which  are  tombs  of  the  prophets,  and  museums  of 
their  dry  bones,  and  condemn  the  poor  to  live  in  hovels.  They  hold  a man  in 
esteem  if  he  is  rich  and  goes  to  church.  If  a man  be  a steady  church-goer  he  is  a 
good  man,  though  he  deals  in  worthless  goods,  or  cheats  every  market-day,  or  is  a 
faithless  servant,  or  a heartless  acquaintance.  If  a man  is  ever  so  honest  and  indus- 
trious and  kind,  he  is  only  a moral  man  unless  he  make  a great  profession  of 
religion.  Are  these  Christ’s  ideas  of  truth  and  goodness  as  they  are  here  expressed  ? 
Is  this  goodness  anything  like  Christ?” — Pp.  115-16. 

We  discover  no  standard  in  this  book  higher  than  the  ethics  and  religion 
of  heathenism.  Its  animus  toward  the  evangelical  and  supernatural  in 
Christianity  is  so  bitter  as  to  be  its  own  antidote;  indeed  it  gives  us  Chris- 
tianity without  Christ.  For  although  it  often  refers  to  him,  it  recognizes 
him  only  as  Teacher,  Exemplar,  Martyr.  He  is  divine,  as  we  see  in  him  “ all 
that  we  have  ever  conceived  of  in  the  way  of  goodness  ; since  divine  is  a 
name  for  the  highest  and  best,  this  is  divine.”  This  is  what  Christ’s  divinity 
amounts  to,  according  to  this  volume. 

Chas.  B.  Cox,  of  St.  Louis,  publishes  seven  discourses  by  Dr.  James  H. 
Brooks,  entitled  Is  the  Bible  True ? which  defends  it  against  the  infidel 
attacks  of  Strauss,  Renan,  et  id  genus  omne,  as  these  worm  themselves  in- 
to the  minds  of  that  part  of  the  community  which  is  inclined  to  welcome  the 
skeptical  arguments  now  or  lately  in  fashion.  This  volume  is  fitted  to  do 
good  among  persons  and  communities  infected  with  this  epidemic.  It  pre- 
sents the  arguments  for  the  inspiration  and  canonicity  of  the  books  of  the 
Bible  in  a clear,  compact  and  cogent  form,  and  gives  a vigorous  refutation 
of  objections.  We  are  especially  struck  with  the  overwhelming  impres- 
sion produced  by  the  author’s  array  and  collation  of  texts  to  prove  that 
the  Bible  asserts  itself  to  be  the  word  of  God,  however  it  may  immediately 
proceed  from  the  mouth,  or  pen,  of  men  employed  as  instruments  for  its 
utterance.  It  is  none  the  less  the  Lord  that  speaks,  though  he  speaks  with 
the  tongue,  or  pen,  or  in  the  peculiar  style  of  any  man. 

George  Bell  & Sons,  London,  publish  a work,  of  which  Scribner,  Arm- 
strong & Co.  have  imported  a special  edition  for  use  in  this’ country  at 
$3.75,  entitled  The  Doctritial  System  of  St.  John  Considered  as  Evidence 
for  the  Date  of  his  Gospel , by  the  Rev.  J.  J.  Lias,  M.A.  The  object  of  the 
author  is  to  show  that  in  John’s  Gospel  our  Saviour  sets  forth  in  forms  more 
or  less  complete,  at  all  events  in  germ  and  substance,  the  doctrines  more 
extensively  and  minutely  elaborated  in  the  epistles,  and  to  some  extent  re- 
ferred to  in  the  synoptical  gospels.  This  is  ably  done.  It  is  in  some  respects 
very  much  like  some  of  the  treatises  published  from  time  to  time  on  the 


1877-] 


Contemporary  Literature. 


565 


Theology  of  Christ.  For  this  is  most  largely  given  out  in  St.  John’s  Gospel. 
The  author  shows  this  to  be  so  in  regard  to  the  great  doctrines  of  the 
Trinity,  Incarnation,  Atonement,  Sin,  Grace,  Regeneration,  Justification, 
Sanctification,  Election,  in  a word,  Anthropology,  Soteriology  and  Escha- 
tology. He  also  shows  that  Christ  in  this  Gospel  furnishes  many  of  the 
forms  of  language  and  imagery  for  the  due  expression  of  the  great  truths  of 
Supernaturalism  and  Redemption  which  pervade  the  Epistles.  We  notice 
that  the  author,  while  thoroughly  evangelical  in  tone,  nevertheless  is  a little 
confused  on  an  occasional  point  of  cardinal  moment.  He  holds  to  justifica- 
tion by  imparted  as  well  as  imputed  righteousness.  • But  his  book  is,  on  the 
whole,  learned  and  discriminating,  and  an  important  addition  to  Johannean 
literature  and  the  supports  of  sound  Scriptural  doctrine.  Of  course,  if  the 
Epistles  presuppose  St.  John’s  gospel,  this  must  have  been  of  an  earlier 
date.  For  sale  also  by  McGinnis  & Runyon,  Princeton. 

Questions  Awakened  by  the  Bible,  by  the  Rev.  John  Miller,  published 
by  Lippincott  of  Philadelphia,  was  received  just  after  all  the  matter  of  our 
last  number  had  gone  to  press.  Meanwhile  the  Presbytery  of  New  Bruns- 
wick, of  which  the  author  is  a member,  have  taken  it  in  hand  and  found 
unanimously  that  it  denies  certain  important  doctrines  of  our  standards,  and 
have  accordingly  suspended  its  author  from  the  ministry.  It  consists  of  three 
monograms  respectively  in  answer  to  the  questions,  “ Is  the  soul  immortal  ?” 
“ Was  Christ  in  Adam  ?”  “ Is  God  a Trinity?”  In  regard  to  these  severally  the 
Presbytery  unanimously  found  : 1.  “ That  Mr.  Miller  teaches  that  the  soul  is 
not  immortal;  that  at  the  death  of  the  body  it  dies  and  becomes  extinct.” 
2.  “That  Christ,  as  a child  of  Adam,  was  personally  accounted  guilty  of 
Adam’s  sin  ; that,  like  other  children  of  Adam,  he  inherited  a corrupt  nature, 
and  that  he  needed  to  be  and  was  redeemed  by  his  own  death.”  3.  “ That 
there  is  but  one  person  in  the  T rinity.  ” This  is  the  last  of  a comparatively  re- 
cent series  of  books  published  by  the  author,  which  certainly  indicate  a quite 
eccentric  astuteness,  subtlety  and  industry.  They  have  enforced  a tran- 
sient attention  by  the  amazement  they  have  caused  that  such  extravagances 
should  proceed  from  Princeton,  and  from  the  son  of  so  illustrious  a defender 
of  the  faith  they  impugn  as  the  Rev.  Samuel  Miller,  D.D.,  one  of  the 
earliest  professors  of  the  Seminary.  One  of  his  books,  which  is  written  for 
the  purpose  of  branding  the  systematic  theology  of  Dr.  Hodge  as  a system 
ofFetichism,  under  the  title  of  “Fetich  in  Theology,”  sufficiently  reveals 
some  strange  mental  bias  or  disturbance.  In  undertaking  the  role  of  a great 
originator  and  discoverer  of  new  light  in  philosophy  and  theology,  it  will  be 
fortunate  if  he  comes  to  agree  with  most  of  those  who  have  examined  his 
writings  most  closely,  that  he  has  mistaken  his  vocation. 

Scribner,  Armstrong  & Co.  publish,  and  McGinness  & Runyon  have  on 
sale,  Christianity  and  Islam,  the  Bible  and  the  Koran.  Four  Lectures  by 
the  Rev.  W.  R.  W.  Stephens,  Prebendary  of  Chichester.  They  treat  of 
the  origin  of  Christianity  and  Mohammedanism,  the  life  and  character  of 
[New  Series,  No.  22.)  ~g 


566 


Contemporary  Literature. 


[July, 


Mahomet,  the  contrast  between  the  theological  teaching  of  the  Bible  and 
the  Koran,  also  between  the  moral  teaching  of  the  two,  and,  what  is  not  the 
least  important,  the  practical  results  of  Christianity  and  Islam.  It  is  done 
in  a calm,  discriminating,  judicial  manner,  and  presents  the  grand  points  of 
distinction  between  the  two  systems  with  more  justice  and  in  a shorter  com- 
pass than  any  other  easily  accessible  book  known  to  us.  These  lectures  do 
not  run  into  original  investigation  or  speculation,  but  rather  present  the  re- 
sults reached  by  Newman,  Smith,  Gibbon,  Milman,  and  others,  in  a con- 
densed and  popular  form.  The  author  justly  states  their  drift  thus  : 

“ To  the  great  prophet  of  Arabia,  and  to  the  marvelous  work  which  he  accom- 
plished, I have  endeavored  to  do  justice,  in  opposition  to  the  false  and  calumnious 
estimate  which  in  a past  age  condemned  Mahomet  himself  as  a kind  of  malicious 
fiend,  and  his  religion  as  a diabolical  invention.  On  the  other  hand,  I have  sought 
to  show  that  Christianity  and  Islam  are  radically  diverse  in  the  nature  of  their 
origin,  in  the  character  of  their  sacred  books,  and  in  their  practical  effects  on  man- 
kind ; that  the  difference  between  them  is  one  not  of  degree,  but  of  kind,  accord- 
ing to  the  wise  saying  of  Dr.  Arnold,  that  while  other  religions  showed  us  man 
seeking  after  God,  Christianity  showed  us  God  seeking  after  man  ; a maxim  which 
students  of  the  crude  science  of  comparative  religion  are  apt  to  forget.  I have 
endeavored,  lastly,  to  point  out  that  if  there  be  these  real  and  vital  distinctions 
between  the  two  religions,  it  is  worse  than  folly  to  try  and  ignore  them;  that 
while  there  ought  to  be,  and  might  be,  peace  and  good  will  between  the  believers 
in  rival  creeds,  it  should  not  be  placed  on  a rotten  foundation — the  rotten  founda- 
tion which  would  be  laid  by  those  who  see  imaginary  resemblances,  and  are  blind 
to  real  distinctions  ; for  if  indiscriminate  antagonism  is  mischievous,  indiscrimi- 
nate concession  is  mischievous  also,  and  can  only  lead  to  confusion  and  disas- 
ter.”—Pp.  7,  8. 

The  two  treatises  of  the  late  Dr.  Horace  Bushnell,  on  the  Vicarious  Sac- 
rifice, originally  published  at  successive  times,  and  the  latter  partly  in  cor- 
rection and  amendment  of  the  former,  have  now  been  published  by  Scribner, 
Armstrong  Sc  Co-,  uniform  as  one  work  in  two  volumes.  The  brilliancy,  orig- 
inality, ingenuity  and  earnestness  of  the  author  are  conspicuous  in  these  vol- 
umes, as  in  all  his  works.  The  work  abounds  in  instructive  and  edifying  pas- 
sages. But  the  greatest  prodigy  of  all,  which  his  genius  proved  inadequate  to 
explain,  is  how  a sane  mind,  however  grand  and  magnificent,  could  have  un- 
dertaken to  show  that  a strict  vicarious  sacrifice  of  Christ  as  the  sinner’s  sub- 
stitute should  “ involve  the  loss  or  confusion  of  all  moral  distinctions”  in  God) 
while,  at  the  same  time,  “ this  simplest  form  of  absurdity”  constitutes  that 
“ altar  form,”  under  which  the  soul  must  work  itself  in  Christian  cultus  if  it 
would  flourish  in  the  Christian  life.  It  is  hard  to  see  how  two  such  states  of 
mind  could  coexist  without  a prodigious  strain  upon  the  faculty  of  reason. 
It  is  w^ell  that  he  saw  cause  to  somewhat  modify  his  earlier  views. 

The  Christian  Way:  Whither  it  Leads,  and  How  to  Go  On.  By 

Washington  Gladden.  New  York:  Dodd,  Mead  & Co.,  1877.  We 
heartily  welcome  this  little  volume.  It  is  designed  as  a sequel  to  “ Being  a 


i8  77-] 


Contemporary  Literature. 


567 


Christian,”  by  the  same  author,  which  was  an  excellent  help  to  enter  the 
Christian  way,  and  we  join  in  the  devout  wish  of  the  writer  that  this  one 
may  lead  many  from  the  joy  of  beginning  into  “ the  glory  of  going  on.”" 
It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  “ some  clear  and  definite  religious  teaching  is 
needed  by  those  who  have  entered  the  church,  as  well  as  by  those  who  seek 
to  enter  it.  . . . It  is  important  to  know  how  to  begin  to  be  a Christian; 
and  it  is  equally  important  to  know  how  to  go  on.”  Hence  this  little  vol- 
ume. The  titles  of  the  several  chapters  will  show  its  scope : The  Chris- 
tian’s Aim,  The  Christian’s  Calling,  The  Christian  in  the  Church,  The 
Christian  as  a Witness.The  Christian  in  Business,  The  Christian  in  Society,- 
The  Christian’s  Quiet  Life. 

Our  Theological  Century:  A Contribution  to  the  History  of  Theology  in 
the  United  States.  By  JOHN  F.  HURST,  D.D.  New  York:  A.  D.  F.  Randolph 
& Co.,  1877.  This  essay  was  originally  prepared  for  public  deliver)',  and  was 
so  used  on  several  occasions.  It  has  been  revised  and  enlarged,  and  is  now 
given  to  the  public  in  its  present  fixed  form.  Dr.  Hurst  is  too  well  known 
as  a writer  to  need  commendation  from  us.  This  contribution  to  the  history 
of  American  theology  covers  considerable  ground,  and  presents  the  theo- 
logical conditions  of  the  beginning  of  our  national  era,  the  American  de- 
velopment of  theological  thought,  theological  results,  and  present  theological 
necessities.  It  is,  of  course,  only  an  outline,  and  is  popular  in  form.  Still 
it  contains  much  that  is  worth  reading  and  pondering.  “ Adherence  to  pure 
Christian  doctrine,  and  growdh  in  that  doctrine — these  have  been  the  forces 
of  our  highest  and  purest  national  life.”  The  author  claims  a very  high 
place  for  American  writers  and  thinkers  in  the  theological  field,  and  thinks 
before  “ another  generation  shall  pass  away  we  shall  see  the  new  phenomena 
of  European  masters  in  theology  referring  the  young  men  who  are  to  suc- 
ceed them  to  the  productions  of  the  American  theological  mind  ; and  a little 
later,  the  still  greater  phenomena  of  German  and  British  aspirants  for  ex- 
cellence in  theology  coming  to  this  country,  as  the  early  theological  students 
to  vigorous  young  Alexandria  and  Corinth,  for  the  completion  of  their 
studies  at  these  sources  of  advancing  doctrinal  thought.” 

The  Children  of  Light,  by  Rev.  Wm,  W.  Faris.  Boston:  Roberts 
Bro  thers,  1877.  i2mo,  pp.  312.  The  Hon.  Richard  Fletcher,  LL.D., 
of  Boston,  made  Dartmouth  College  his  residuary  legatee,  and  provided  for 
a special  fund  to  be  under  the  care  of  the  trustees  of  said  college,  from  the 
avails  of  which  they  are  to  offer  biennially  a prize  of  $500  for  the  best 
essay  on  the  subject  indicated  in  the  following  extract  from  his  will : 

“ In  view  of  the  numerous  and  powerful  influences  constantly  active  in  drawung 
professed  Christians  into  fatal  conformity  with  the  world,  both  in  spirit  and  practice; 
in  view  also  of  the  lamentable  and  amazing  fact  that  Christianity  exerts  so  little 
practical  influence,  even  in  countries  nominally  Christian,  it  has  seemed  to  me  that 
some  good  might  be  done  by  making  permanent  provision  for  obtaining  and  pub- 
lishing once  in  two  years  a prize  essay,  setting  forth  truths  and  reasonings  calculated 


$68 


Contemporary  Literature. 


[July, 


to  counteract  such  worldly  influences,  and  impressing  on  the  minds  of  all  Christians 
a solemn  sense  of  their  duty  to  exhibit,  in  their  godly  lives  and  conversation,  the 
beneficent  effects  of  the  religion  they  profess,  and  thus  increase  the  efficiency  of 
Christianity  in  Christian  countries,  and  recommend  its  acceptance  to  the  heathen 
nations  of  the  world.” 

We  have  given  this  extract  not  only  to  indicate  the  scope  and  character 
of  the  essay  in  this  volume,  to  which  this  prize  was  awarded,  but  because  the 
language  sets  forth  so  clearly  and  truthfully  one  of  the  most  marked  and 
alarming  tendencies  of  the  times.  We  honor  the  noble  purpose  of  the  giver, 
and  trust  that  these  biennial  prizes  will  be  worthy  of  the  high  end  in  view, 
and  prove  eminently  useful. 

The  work  before  us  is  admirably  written.  It  is  methodical  in  arrange- 
ment, pure  and  simple  in  style,  evangelical  in  spirit,  and  scriptural  in  its 
teaching.  The  author  divides  his  essay  into  five  parts,  after  a brief  survey 
• of  the  Lights  and  Shadows.  Part  First. — Coming  to  the  Light,  i.  Start- 
ling Out.  2.  Locating  the  Light.  Part  Second. — Mistaking  Darkness  for 
Light,  i.  Stumbling.  2.  Falling.  3.  Maimed.  4.  Reproved  and  Re- 
called. Part  Third. — Standing  in  the  Light.  1.  Learning  to  See.  2. 
The  Fellowship  of  Light.  3.  The  Secret  of  Light.  4.  The  Laws  of  Light. 
Part  Fourth. — Walking  in  the  Light.  1.  Christian  Conduct,  What?  and 
Why?  2.  In  the  Home.  3.  In  the  Church.  4.  Among  Men.  Part  Fifth. 
— Working  in  the  Light.  1.  Responsibility.  2.  Hindrances.  3.  Motives. 
4.  What  to  do.  This  analysis  of  the  contents  will  give  the  reader  an  intelli- 
gent idea  of  the  book,  which  we  earnestly  commend  as  a timely  and  admira- 
ble contribution  to  our  practical  religious  literature. 

Biblical  Literature. 

Scribner,  Welford&  Armstrong  respectively  publish  and  sell  at  $6,  a second 
^edition,  revised  and  improved,  of  The  Training  of  the  Twelves  °r,  Passages 
out  of  the  Gospels,  exhibiting  the  Twelve  Disciples  of  J esus  under  Discipline 
for  the  Apostleship,  by  Alexander  Balmain  Bruce,  D.D.,  Professor  of 
Theology,  Free  Church  College,  Glasgow.  Like  Prof.  Bruce’s  more  recent 
work  on  the  Humiliation  of  Christ,  this  has  decided  value.  It  brings  to 
view  and  opens  out  the  meaning  of  the  various  discourses,  parables,  teach- 
ings, incidents,  in  the  course  of  our  Lord’s  ministry  in  connection  with  his 
Apostles,  which  served  in  any  degree  to  train  them  for  their  great  mission. 
This  constitutes  a very  large  part  of  our  Lord’s  life  and  ministry.  While 
this  volume  has  the  general  merit  of  sound  exegesis,  it  brings  the  added 
light  which  results  from  surveying  the  Saviour’s  teachings  from  a special 
standpoint,  and  with  special  respect  to  their  convergence  toward  one  great 
end.  They  have  a good  deal  of  exegetical  theology,  and  are  rich  inhomileti- 
cal  applications  of  it  to  ministers  and  people.  For  sermonizers  and  exhorters 
they  are  especially  rich  and  suggestive,  in  helping  preparation  alike  for 
topical  and  expository  discourses. 

Scribner,  Armstrong  & Co.  publish,  and  McGinnis  & Runyon  have  for 
sale  in  Princeton,  another  volume  of  the  Great  Commentary  of  Lange,  edited 


1 877.] 


Contemporary  Lit erat lire. 


569 


by  Dr.  Schaff.  It  is  on  the  Books  of  Samuel,  by  Rev.,,  Dr.  Chr.  Fr. 
David  Erdmann,  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  University  of  Breslau,  and 
is  translated,  enlarged  and  edited  in  an  able  manner  by  Rev.  C.  H.  Toy, 
D.D.,  LL.D.,  and  Rev.  John  A.  Broadus,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professors  in 
the  Theological  Seminary  in  Greenville,  S.  C.  We  welcome  this  addition 
to  our  apparatus  for  the  due  interpretation  and  application  of  this  particular 
book  of  Scripture  in  itself,  and  as  an  earnest  of  the  speedy  completion  of  the 
publication  in  English  of  the  exhaustive  and  encyclopediac  work  of  which  it 
is  a part. 

Outlines  of  Hebrew  Grammar,  by  Gustavus  Bickell,  D.D.,  Professor 
of  Theology  at  Innsbruck,  revised  by  the  author,  and  annotated  by  the 
translator,  Samuel  Ives  Curtiss,  Jr.,  Ph.D.,  with  a lithographic  table 
of  Semitic  characters,  by  Dr.  J.  EUTING,  Leipzig,  1877.  This  little  book  of 
140  pages  contains  a great  deal  of  instructive  matter  with  reference  to  the 
history  and  etymology  of  the  Hebrew  language.  It  is  not  an  introductory 
grammar  to  vie  with  Davidson,  Green  or  Seffer,  or,  indeed,  a text-book  of  a 
more  advanced  character.  It  is  rather  an  outline  of  the  principles  of 
Hebrew  grammar  from  the  standpoint  of  comparative  philology,  and  thus 
designed  for  advanced  students.  As  such  it  has  its  appropriate  place  among 
the  constantly  increasing  number  of  Hebrew  grammars.  The  principles  of 
Hebrew  accentuation  (§18-20)  have  been  prepared  by  Dr.  Franz  Delitzsch, 
the  very  best  authority  on  this  subject.  Dr.  Curtiss  has  done  excellent  work 
both  in  his  translation  and  notes.  We  can  only  express  our  regret  that 
Hebrew  syntax  receives  so  little  attention,  for  this  subject  demands  more 
labor,  and  needs  that  more  light  should  be  thrown  upon  it. 

The  Apologies  of  Justin  Martyr,  and  the  Epistle  to  Diognetus,  with 
an  introduction  and  notes,  by  Basil  L.  Gildersleeve,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Pro- 
fessor of  Greek  in  the  John  Hopkins  University,  Baltimore.  Harpers,  1877.. 
This  new  volume  of  the  Douglas  series  of  Christian  Greek  and  Latin  writers 
is  an  admirable  one.  The  introductions  are  full  and  satisfactory ; the 
analysis  thorough,  and  the  text  carefully  edited.  The  notes  are  the  chief 
features  of  the  book,  and  these  are  models  of  conciseness,  completeness 
and  scholarship.  The  points  of  syntax,  especially,  are  worthy  of  careful 
consideration,  as  Dr.  Gildersleeve  brings  into  comparison  with  the  Greek  of 
Justin,  the  classic  authors,  the  LXX,  the  New  Testament,  and  Hellenistic 
writers  generally,  as  well  as  the  Hebrew  idiom.  There  are  three  indices  : 
Greek  terms,  texts  of  Scripture,  and  subjects.  This  work  will  be  even  more 
useful  to  theological  students  and  the  studious  ministry  than  to  students  of 
Christian  Greek  in  the  college  course. 

T.  & T.  Clark  of  Edinburgh  and  Scribner,  Welford  & Armstrong  pub- 
lish, at  $3.00,  another  volume  of  Meyer’s  Critical  and  Exegetical  Com- 
mentary on  the  New  Testament,  being  Vol.  I.  of  the  Critical  and  Exeget- 
ical Handbook  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  extending  through  chapter  xii; 
translated  by  the  Paton  J.  Gloag,  D.  D.,  and  revised  and  edited  by  Dr. 


570 


Contemporary  Literature.  . 


[July, 


William  P.  Dickson,  Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Glasgow. 
The  high  merits  of  this  commentary  are  recognized  among  exegetes  and 
biblical  students,  and  it  is  eagerly  sought  for  their  libraries  by  all  of  this  class 
who  can  afford  to  purchase  them.  For  sale  in  Princeton  by  McGinness  & 
Runyon. 

History  and  Biography. 

Ex-President  Maclean's  History  of  Princeton  College.  One  of  the  most 
important  among  recent  historical  productions  has  reached  us  at  the 
last  moment.  It  is  entitled  the  History  of  the  College  of  New  Jersey  from 
its  Origin  i/i  1746  to  the  Commencement  of  1854,  by  John  Maclean,  the 
tenth  President  of  the  College,  in  two  handsome  octavo  volumes  ; published 
by  J B.  Lippincott  & Co.  of  Philadelphia,  in  a style  as  creditable  to  the  pub- 
lishers as  the  contents  are  to  its  honored  and  venerable  author.  It  is  the 
first  and  only  thorough  history  of  Princeton  College  that  has  yet  been  writ- 
ten. Interesting  and  valuable  historical  fragments  and  monograms  have 
been  published,  but  this  is  the  first  complete  and  continuous  history  of  one 
of  the  earliest  and  largest  of  the  great  historical  colleges  of  the  country.  It 
is  from  the  hand  above  all  others  qualified  for  the  task.  President  Maclean, 
himself  the  son  of  an  eminent  early  professor  of  the  institution,  born  and 
reared  within  its  classic  shades,  personally  connected  with  it  as  stu- 
dent, tutor,  professor,  president,  for  more  than  half  a century,  a resident 
of  Princeton  since  his  retirement  from  office,  has  had  means  of  knowledge, 
and  access  to  trustworthy  sources  of  information,  possible  to  no  other 
man.  The  preparation  of  it  has  afforded  him  becoming  and  useful  occupa- 
tion during  his  declining  years ; and  it  is  fortunate  that  he  has  had  leisure 
to  test  the  truth  of  his  narrative,  to  work  it  up  thoroughly  and  well,  and  to 
make  an  enduring  monument  for  himself  and  the  college  out  of  materials 
that  were  fast  passing  into  an  oblivion  from  which  they  could  not  otherwise 
have  been  rescued. 

Of  course  these  volumes  will  be  precious  and  attractive,  not  merely  to  the 
graduates  and  immediate  friends  of  the  college,  but  to  all  lovers  of  high  edu- 
cation, and  especially  those  interested  in  the  successive  stages  of  its  develop- 
ment in  our  larger  and  elder  seats  of  learning.  But  this  is  not  all.  These 
volumes  shed  great  light  upon  important  epochs  and  passages  of  American 
history,  civil  and  ecclesiastical — particularly  the  Revolutionary  epoch,  with 
the  periods  preceding  and  following  it.  Old  Nassau  Hall  was  alternately 
barracks  for  one  or  the  other  of  the  contending  armies.  Dr.  Witherspoon, 
its  president  during  the  Revolutionary  era,  was  equally  conspicuous  as  a 
civilian,  a divine,  and  an  educator ; and  was  among  the  foremost  of  the  Rev- 
olutionary statesmen  that  declared  our  national  independence  and  brought 
our  nation  to  its  birth,  as  also  of  the  divines  that  framed  the  Constitution  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church.  His  line  of  predecessors,  Dickinson,  Burr,  Ed- 
wards, Davies,  Finley,  contains  the  most  illustrious  names  of  early  Presby- 
terian and  ecclesiastical  history,  while  those  that  follow  were  among  the 
burning  and  shining  lights  of  the  church.  Indeed,  the  college  was  founded, 


1877-] 


Contemporary  Literature. 


571 


first  of  all,  in  the  interest  of  religion — to  raise  up  a learned  ministry  for  the 
church,  and  trained  leaders  in  the  State,  and  in  every  sphere  of  professional 
life.  Indeed,  it  grew  more  immediately  out  of  the  great  revival  of  1740,  and 
was  especially  founded  and  fostered  by  friends  and  supporters  of  that  work. 
Its  history  is  therefore  very  largely  the  history  of  the  early  and  formative  era  of 
the  American  Presbyterian  Church.  The  very  mention  of  the  names  of  its 
presidents  will  show  that  the  history  of  their  successive  administrations  in- 
volves matters  of  the  highest  moment  in  the  religious  development  of  our 
country. 

We  trust  that  this  work  will  command  the  attention  and  the  circulation  it 
richly  deserves. 

Historical  Sketch  of  Presbyterianism  within  the  bounds  of  the  Synod  oj 
■Central  New  York.  By  P.  H.  Fowler,  D.D.  Utica:  Curtiss  & Childs  ; 
pp.  755  1877.  This  work  was  a labor  of  love,  and  was  prepared  and  pub- 

lished at  the  request  of  the  Synod,  whose  history  it  records  with  fullness  of 
detail,  and  in  so  lucid  a manner,  and  in  a style  so  pleasing,  as  to  make  it  a 
book  of  no  ordinary  interest  even  to  the  general  reader.  The  work  could 
not  have  fallen  into  more  competent  hands  ; and  most  worthily  and  con- 
scientiously has  the  task  been  performed.  The  history  covers  a period  of 
seventy  years ; and  all  will  agree  with  the  author  that  the  “ dealings  of  the 
Spirit  with  the  churches  of  his  own  loved  denomination  on  that  field  have 
been  remarkable  and  even  wonderful.’' 

Presbyterianism  in  Central  New  York  was  born  and  nurtured  under  the 
happiest  auspices.  “ The  best  of  ministers  waited  upon  it,  generally  the 
alumni  of  Eastern  colleges  and  seminaries,  intelligent  and  disciplined, 
earnest  and  faithful,  orthodox  and  orderly ; and  they  saw  to  it  that  their 
succession  was  kept  up,  an d.  candidates  for  ordination  and  applicants  from 
foreign  bodies  were  thoroughly  examined  as  to  their  piety  and  literary  and 
theological  attainments.”  * * “Great  stress  was  laid  on  doctrinal 

truth,  and  it  entered  largely  into  preaching  and  conversation  as  the  prime 
and  principal  element  of  Christian  experience  and  living.”  * * * 

“ Calvanism  being  the  system  that  was  accepted  and  exacted,” 

While  the  sketches  of  individual  churches  and  institutions  on  the  field  are 
a prominent  feature,  no  little  space  is  devoted  to  revivals,  “the  jewels  and  crown 
of  Presbyterianism  in  Central  New  York.”  They  began  with  “the  great 
revival  of  1799,”  and  have  kept  up  almost  continuously  down  to  the  present 
time.  In  these  revivals  originated  many,  if  not  the  majority,  of  the  churches 
on  this  favored  field.  This  region  was  the  scene  of  Mr.  Finney’s  remark- 
able ministry,  which  began  in  1824,  and  was  the  occasion  of  “violent  dis- 
cussions and  animosities  in  the  Presbyterian  Church  throughout  the  land.” 
Dr.  Fowler  treats  this  branch  of  the  subject  with  intelligent  discrimination 
and  sound  judgment.  His  sketch  of  Mr.  Finney,  as  a man  and  a preacher, 
and  the  wonderful  effects  of  his  preaching,  is  exceedingly  graphic  and 
interesting.  He  freely  admits  his  faults  and  errors,  both  of  manner  and 


5 72  Contemporary  Literature.  [July, 

doctrine,  some  of  which  were  serious ; but  he  claims  for  him  a distinguished 
place  in  the  regards  of  the  Church,  and  attributes  no  small  part  of  the 
growth  and  prosperity  of  the  churches  of  Central  and  Western  New  York  to 
the  revivals  which  were  connected  with  his  preaching.  At  the  same  time 
his  remarks  on  the  whole  subject  of  Revivals  and  Evangelists  are  pregnant 
with  meaning ; they  are  timely  ; they  deserve  to  be  studied  and  pondered ; 
they  are  the  expression  of  a sound  philosophy  ; the  mature  reflections  of  one 
who  has  carefully  observed  and  studied  the  subject. 

We  regret  that  we  cannot  do  better  justice  to  this  valuable  history,  but  it 
came  to  hand  at  the  last  hour. 

The  book  also  contains  an  address  delivered  before  the  Synod  of  Central 
New  York  in  October  last,  entitled  The  Presbyterian  Element  in  our 
National  Life  and  History , by  Prof.  J.  W.  Mears.  The  theme  was  a 
fitting  one  for  our  Centennial  Year,  and  is  here  handled  with  ability  and 
effect. 

A History  and  Manual  of  the  Second  Presbyterian  Church  in  Troy, 
N.  K,  prepared  and  published  in  its  semi-centennial  year,  July  2d,  1876,  by 
its  pastor,  Dr.  William  Irvin,  is  a most  cheering  and  creditable  record. 
It  is  the  history  of  one  of  our  largest  churches,  which,  although  not  without 
vicissitudes  of  trial,  has,  on  the  whole,  been  steadily  prosperous,  growing 
itself  while  giving  birth  to  and  nourishing  to  the  point  of  self-support 
flourishing  daughter  churches.  Its  history  is  what  might  have  been  ex- 
pected from  its  noble  succession  of  pastors,  which  includes  some  of  the 
brightest  names  that  have  adorned  the  Presbyterian  pulpit. 

Scribner,  Armstrong  & Co.  publish  Charles  Kingsley,  his  Letters  and 
Memories  of  his  Life , edited  by  his  wife,  and  abridged  from  the  London 
edition.  It  awakens  additional  tender  memories  as  it  reminds  us  of  the  life  and 
death,  the  literary  ability  and  activity,  and  the  marked  Christian  virtues  of  the 
author  of  the  abridgment,  Mr.  Edward  Seymour,  whose  recent  sudden 
decease  is  so  great  a loss,  not  only  to  the  eminent  publishing  house  of  which 
he  was  an  honorable  member,  but  to  the  wide  circle  of  authorship  and 
letters.  • This  volume  is  in  all  respects  the  better  for  the  abridgment.  It  is 
a rich  and  welcome  contribution  to  that  luxuriant  issue  of  memoirs,  biog- 
raphies and  autobiographies  of  eminent  literary  and  professional  men,  which 
constitute  so  salient  a part  of  recent  literature. 

Charles  Kingsley  united  in  a remarkable  degree  the  poet,  novelist,  radical, 
socialistic  reformer,  political  agitator,  theological  innovator,  the  earnest  and 
vigorous  preacher  and  active  pastor  in  the  Anglican  Church ; he  was,  in 
short,  a genius,  setting  himself  at  work  in  all  directions  to  remove  real  or 
seeming  abuses  in  Church  and  State,  which  he  saw  clearly  and  felt  keenly. 
In  religion  he  was  the  broadest  of  Broad  Churchmen.  He  takes  no  pains 
to  conceal,  but  is  ever  eager  to  obtrude,  his  intense  antipathy  to  that  concrete 
system  of  doctrines  known  as  Evangelical.  There  are  few  established 
truths,  doctrines  or  institutions  which  do  not  undergo  more  or  less  of  skepti- 


i877-] 


Contemporary  Literature. 


573 


cal  searching  and  testing  at  his  hand.  While  his  sincere  and  unselfish 
spirit,  in  dealing  with  the  great  concerns  of  God  and  man,  is  as  conspicuous 
as  his  originality  and  brilliancy  of  treatment,  yet  it  is  manifest  that  his 
mind  had  a one-sidedness,  a tendency  to  detect  and  magnify  the  evils,  weak- 
nesses and  faults,  rather  than  duly  to  appreciate  the  strength,  merit  and  ex- 
cellence of  accepted  systems  and  existing  institutions.  Yet,  it  is  gratifying 
to  observe  that  as  he  advanced  in  life  and  experience  he  became  more  awake 
to  the  substantial  claims  of  much  in  the  existing  social,  political  and  relig- 
ious organizations  to  which  he  was  before  blind,  and  to  the  fallacies  of  the 
ideal,  speculative  and  unpractical,  in  his  Alton  Locke  and  other  early  publi- 
cations. Maurice  seems  to  have  been,  beyond  all  others,  at  once  his  master 
and  his  ideal.  Writing  to  him,  Mr.  Kingsley  said  : 

“As  to  the  Trinity,  I do  understand  you  : you  first  taught  me  that  the  Trinity  was 
a live  thing,  and  not  a mere  formula  to  be  swallowed  by  the  undigesting  reason  ; and 
from  the  time  that  I learned  from  you  that  a Father  meant  a real  Father,  a Son  a 
real  Son,  and  a Holy  Spirit  a real  Spirit,  who  was  really  good  and  holy,  I have 
been  able  to  draw  all  sorts  of  practical  lessons  from  it  in  the  pulpit.” — P.  357. 

He  appears  to  have  fluctuated  very  much  in  his  ideas  as  to  the  binding 
force  of  assent  to  the  articles  of  a creed,  and  at  times  to  have  come  nearer 
the  truth  than  Maurice,  to  whom  in  one  case  he  writes  thus : 

“ I don’t  quite  understand  one  point  in  your  letter.  You  say,  ‘ The  Articles  were 
not  intended  to  bind  men’s  thoughts  or  consciences.’  Now,  I can't  help  feeling  that 
when  they  assert  a proposition,  e.  g.,  the  Trinity,  they  assert  that  that  and  nothing  else 
in  that  matter  is  true,  and  so  bind  thought ; and  that  they  require  me  to  swear 
that  I believe  it  so,  and  so  bind  my  conscience.” — P.  358. 

But  he  clearly  avows  his  unwillingness  to  be  bound  by  any  popular,  how- 
ever obvious,  interpretation  of  the  articles,  or  to  be  denied  the  liberty  of 
placing  any  “ non-natural  sense  ” upon  them  he  may  like,  in  the  following 
deliverance  : 

“ For  myself  I can  sign  the  Articles  in  their  literal  sense  toto  corde , and  subscrip- 
tion is  no  bondage  to  me,  and  so  I am  sure  can  you.  But  all  I demand  is,  that  in 
signing  the  Articles  I shall  be  understood  to  sign  them  and  nothing  more  ; that  I 
do  not  sign  anything  beyond  the  words,  and  demand  the  right  to  put  my  construc- 
tion on  the  words,  answerable  only  to  God  and  my  conscience,  and  refusing  to 
accept  any  sense  of  the  words,  however  popular  and  venerable,  unless  I choose.  In 
practice  Gorham  and  Pusey  both  do  this  and  nothing  else  whenever  it  suits  them. 
I demand  that  I shall  have  the  same  liberty  as  they,  and  no  more.” — Pp.  358-9. 

It  is  very  obvious  that  this  mode  of  subscription  would  be  elastic  enough 
to  admit  almost  any  grade  of  dissent  and  skepticism.  It  virtually  overrides 
the  true  understanding  and  intent  which  measures  the  obligation 
of  the  parties;  the  true  construction  of  all  such  subscriptions  and 
assent  to  creeds  being  the  understood  mind  of  the  church  which  requires 
them,  animus  impotientis.  Yet  the  experience  of  Mr.  Kingsley  at  length 
taught  him  the  necessity  of  some  such  anchorage  to  hold  him  from  being 
set  adrift,  without  rudder  or  compass,  by  his  own  dreamy  fancy.  He  says  to 
Maurice ; 


574 


Contemporary  Literature. 


[July, 


“ I feel  a capacity  of  drifting  to  sea  in  me  which  makes  me  cling  nervously  to  any 
little  anchor  like  subscription.  I feel  glad  of  aught  that  says  to  me,  ‘You  must 
teach  this  and  nothing  else;  you  must  not  run  riot  in  your  own  dreams.’  ” — P.  360. 

Nor  did  he  fail  to  learn  wisdom  from  experience  in  reference  to  his  early 
socialistic  and  radical  theories.  Speaking  of  natural  political  equality  and 
universal  suffrage,  he  says  : 

“ I have  some  right  to  speak  on  this  subject,  as  I held  that  doctrine  strongly 
myself  in  past  years,  and  was  cured  of  it,  in  spite  of  its  seeming  justice  and  charity, 
by  the  harsh  school  of  facts.  Nearly  a quarter  of  a century  spent  in  educating  my 
parishioners,  and  experience  with  my  own  and  others’  children— in  fact,  that  school- 
ing of  facts  brought  home  to  the  heart,  which  Mr.  Mill  never  had,  have  taught  me 
that  there  are  congenital  differences  and  hereditary  tendencies  which  defy  all  educa- 
tion from  circumstances,  whether  for  good  or  evil.  Society  may  pity  those  who  are 
born  fools  or  knaves,  but  she  cannot,  for  her  own  sake,  allow  them  power  if  she  can 
help  it.” — P.  374. 

The  Life  of  the  Rev.  George  Whitefield,  by  Rev.  L.  Tyerman.  In  2 vols., 
8vo.  New  York:  A.  D.  F.  Randolph  & Co.,  1877.  The  author  of  this 
work  is  well  and  favorably  known  to  the  public  by  his  biographies  of  the 
Wesleys,  Charles  and  John,  and  his  history  of  “ The  Oxford  Methodists.” 
In  their  preparation  he  naturally  accumulated  much  original  and  valuable 
material  for  a new  and  standard  life  of  Whitefield,  the  early  friend  of  the 
Wesleys,  whose  itinerant  services  promoted  Methodism  to  a large  extent. 
The  studies  and  services  of  Mr.  Tyerman  in  this  field  have  fitted  him  preemi- 
nently for  the  task  he  has  here  undertaken  and  so  creditably  achieved. 

The  world  has  a right  to  know  all  that  can  be  told  of  such  a man.  While 
innumerable  sketches,  and  at  least  half  a dozen  lives,  of  Whitefield  have 
already  been  published,  we  have  in  the  present  biography  “a  large  amount 
of  biographical  material  which  previous  biographers  had  not  em- 
ployed, and  much  of  which  seems  to  have  been  unknown  to  them.”  The 
work  is  not  written  with  special  reference  to  the  interest  of  any  denom- 
ination. Whitefield  called  himself  a minister  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land ; but  in  fact  he  belonged  to  the  Church  Catholic.  He  loved  all  who 
loved  Jesus  Christ,  and  was  intent  only  on  the  salvation  of  souls.  The 
author  claims  and  shows  that  “the  friendship  between  Whitefield  and  the 
Wesleys  was  much  more  loving  and  constant  than  it  had  been  represented  by 
previous  biographers;  and  that  Whitefield’s  services  to  Methodism  were 
more  important  than  the  public  generally  had  imagined.”  Whitefield  is 
here  made  as  far  as  is  possible  his  own  biographer.  The  book  is  mainly  one 
of  information.  It  has  the  substance  of  his  journals — journals  which,  unlike 
those  of  the  Wesleys,  have  never  been  republished,  and  which  are  almost 
unknown.  In  this  day,  when  God  is  so  signally  honoring  the  ministry 
of  Evangelists,  such  a biography  is  timely,  and  may  be  read  with  great  profit. 
Whitefield’s  power  was  not  in  his  talents  or  oratory,  but  in  his  piety.  In 
prayer  and  faith  and  religious  experience  and  devotedness  to  God,  and  in  a 
bold  and  steadfast  declaration  of  the  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  he  may 
have  many  true  successors.  God  has,  indeed,  raised  up  some  in  this  gen- 


i8  77-] 


Contemporary  Literature. 


575 


oration  who  are  doing  as  great  a work  for  Christ  and  the  souls  of  men  as 
even  Whitefield  accomplished. 

St.  Augustine,  a Poem  in  Eight  Books,  by  Henry  Warwick  Cole,  Q. 
C.,  is  published  at  $4.50  by  the  Clarks  of  Edingburgh,  Scribner,  Welford 
& Armstrong  of  New  York,  and  for  sale  by  McGinness  and  Runyon  of 
Princeton.  It  is  really  a biography  of  the  illustrious  divine  in  verse,  which 
gives  it  whatever  attractiveness  may  be  thus  imparted  to  a narrative  in  which 
we  detect  very  little  poetry,  but  a very  fine  biographical  portrait  of  the 
greatest  name  in  Christendom  since  the  Apostles.  It  abounds  in  just  and 
beautiful  sketches,  and  estimates  of  the  salient  points  In  his  career  and 
works. 


Miscellaneous. 

Scribner,  Armstrong  Sc  Co.  have  issued  and  have  on  sale  with  McGinness 
and  Runyon  of  Princeton,  a third  series  of  Mr.  FPOUDE’S  Short  Studies  on 
Great  Subjects,  being  a collection  of  papers  previously  given  to  the  public 
in  various  British  and  American  periodicals,  with  the  addition  of  two,  one 
on  Divus  Caesar,  and  another  entitled  Leaves  from  a South  African  Journal, 
never  before  published.  The  latter  is  an  animated  description  of  his  own 
travels  in  that  country'.  The  titles  of  the  others  are  : Annals  of  an  English 
Abbey,  Revival  of  Romanism,  Sea  Studies,  Society  in  Italy  in  the  Last 
Days  of  the  Roman  Republic,  Lucian,  The  Uses  of  a Landed  Gentry,  and 
Party  Politics.  All  these  are  treated  with  brilliancy  and  power.  They  dis- 
play, too,  a versatility  as  great  as  the  variety  of  topics  handled.  We  rarely 
open  a page  which  is  not  glowing  with  the  warmth  and  brightness  of  his 
genius  for  pen-painting,  live  discussions,  vivid  portraitures  of  the  present 
and  the  past.  We  give  an  extract  from  the  essay  on  the  Uses  of  a Landed 
Gentry.  We  should  like  to  give  a dozen  from  almost  every  one  of  his 
papers,  in  which  the  greatest  blemish  is  a certain  rationalistic  tinge  in  his 
treatment  of  most  religious  topics  that  come  in  his  way  : 

“ Every  step  of  what  has  been  called  progress  for  the  last  thousand  years  has  been 
the  work  of  some  man,  or  group  of  men.  We  talk  of  the  tendencies  of  an  age. 
The  tendencies  of  our  age,  unless  it  be  a tendency  to  mere  death  and  rottenness, 
means  the  energy  of  superior  men  who  guide  and  make  it ; and  of  those  superior 
men  who  have  played  their  parts  among  us  at  successive  .periods,  the  hereditary 
families  are  the  monuments.  Trace  them  back  to  the  founders,  you  generally  find 
some  one  whose  memory  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  die.  And  usually,  also,  in  the 
successive  generations  of  such  a family  you  find  more  than  an  average  of  high 
qualities  as  if  therewas  some  transmission  of  good  blood,  or  as  if  the  power  of 
discrediting  good  blood  was  a check  on  folly  and  a stimulus  to  exertion.  In  Scot- 
land the  family  histories  are  inseparable  from  the  national  history.  How  many 
Campbells,  for  example,  have  not  established  a right  to  be  remembered  with  honor  ? 
How  many  hundred  Scotch  families  are  there  not  who  have  not  produced,  I will  not 
say  one  distinguished  man,  but  a whole  series  of  distinguished  men  ? Distinguished 
in  all  branches — as  soldieis  seamen,  statesmen,  lawyers,  or  men  of  letters. 

“ It  is  true  that  the  highest  names  of  all  will  not  be  found  in  the  peerages  and 


576 


Contemporary  Literature. 


[July> 


baronetages.  The  highest  of  all,  as  Burns  says,  take  their  patent  of  nobility  direct 
from  Almighty  God.  Those  patents  are  not  made  out  for  posterity,  and  the  coronets 
which  men  bestow  on  the  supremely  gifted  among  them  are  usually  coronets  of 
thorns.  No  titled  family  remains  a coronet  for  Knox  or  Shakespeare.  They 
shine  alone,  like  stars.  They  need  no  monument,  being  themselves  immortal.  A 
dukedom  of  Stratford  for  the  descendants  of  Shakespeare  would  be  like  a cap  and 
bell  upon  his  bust.  Of  Knox  you  have  not  so  much  as  a tomb ; you  do  not  know 
where  his  bones  are  lying.  The  burial  place  of  Knox  is  in  the  heart  of  Protestant 
Scotland.” — Pp.  302-3. 

From  the  “ Leaves  of  his  South  African  Journal”  we  take  the  following 
account  of  a thunder-storm  which  overtook  him  while  traveling  in  a mail- 
cart: 

“ Between  four  and  five  o’clock  (he  writes)  the  storm  began;  and,  between  the 
darkness  and  the  blinding  effects  of  the  lightning,  in  the  intervals  of  the  flashes,  we 
could  scarcely  see  ten  yards  from  us.  Even  in  South  Africa  I never  saw  such  a 
display  of  celestial  fireworks.  The  lightning  was  rose-color,  deepening  at  times  to- 
crimson.  Each  flash  appeared  like  a cross,  a vertical  line  seeming  to  strike  the 
earth,  a second  line  crossing  it  horizontally.  The  air  was  a blaze  of  fire.  The 
rain  fell  in  such  a deluge  that  the  plain  in  a few  minutes  was  like  a lake.  Of 
course  we  could  not  move.  The  horses  stood  shivering  up  to  their  fetlocks  in 
water.  At  one  time  there  was  no  interval  between  the  lightning  and  the  report,  so 
that  we  were  in  the  very  centre  of  the  storm.  The  sense  of  utter  helplessness  pre- 
vented me  from  being  nervous;  I sat  still  and  looked  at  it  in  mere  amazement.  In 
two  hours  it  was  over.  The  sky  cleared  almost  suddenly,  and,  with  the  dripping 
landscape  shining  in  the  light  of  a summer  sunset,  we  splashed  on  to  the  river.” 
— P.  382. 

* 

A.  D.  F.  Randolph  & Co.  publish  Our  National  Bane  j or,  the  Dry-rot 
in  American  Politics.  A Tract  for  the  Times  touching  Civil  Service 
Reform.  By  George  L.  Prentiss.  Dr.  Prentiss  has  done  capital  service 
in  publishing  this  tract,  which  is,  after  all,  a volume  of  over  100  pages,  every 
sentence  of  which  is  as  pointed  and  telling  as  its  title-page  in  regard  to  the 
great  pest  of  our  politics,  which  beyond  any  cause,  with  the  possible  ex- 
ception of  intemperance,  an  evil  not  by  any  means  disconnected  with  it,  is 
working  not  only  the  political,  but  moral  and  religious  demoralization  of  our 
country,  and  beyond  all  else  threatens  to  be  the  instrument  of  national 
disintegration  and  dissolution.  We  wish  it  could  be  read,  not  only  by  every 
statesman,  official  and  politician,  but  by  every  voter  in  the  country. 

Only  one  thing  needs  to  be  added  to  give  an  adequate  view  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  show  what  cannot  safely  be  overlooked  by  those  who  aim  at  any 
permanent  cure  or  mitigation  of  this  dreadful  evil.  We  refer  to  universal 
suffrage  in  connection  with  the  vast  accession  of  ignorant  and  debased  per- 
sons to  the  franchise  through  the  constant  relaxation  of  naturalization  laws, 
along  with  the  vast  increase  of  the  immigration  of  degraded  people  from 
foreign  countries,  and  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  of  this  country.  The 
debasement  of  the  civil  service,  and  the  prevalence  of  the  doctrine  that 


1 8 77-1 


Contemporary  Literature. 


577 


public  offices  are  the  spoils  of  party  triumph  have  gone  on  pari  passu  with 
the  increase  of  the  vote  of  the  vile  and  worthless.  Upon  this  the  dema- 
gogues so  graphically  sketched  by  Dr.  Prentiss  play  and  thrive.  And  so 
long  as  fifty  votes  from  the  slums  balance  fifty  votes  from  Union  Seminary, 
the  demagogue  who  obtains  this  vote  for  any  Senator  or  Representative,  by 
fair  means  or  foul,  makes  that  official  sensible  of  dependence  on  him  for- 
getting or  keeping  office,  and  unwilling  to  deny  him  the  reward  he  demands. 
Here  is  the  true  fons  et  origo  malorum. 

The  Necrological  Report  of  the  Alumni  of  Princeton  Seminary , for  the 
past  year,  including  three  trustees — the  brothers  John  C.  and  Chancellor 
Henry  W.  Green,  and  Dr.  J.  M.  Macdonald — and  thirty-three  who  had  been 
students  in  the  institution,  contains  the  names  of  the  late  Bishop  Johns,  Drs. 
Wm.  B.  Sprague,  G.  S.  Boardman,  J.  B.  Waterbury,  Robert  Davidson, 
John  S.  Hart,  Nathaniel  H.  Griffin,  M.  W.  Jacobus,  and  several  others  of 
note,  which  of  themselves  are  sufficiently  indicative  of  the  high  work  done 
by  such  institutions.  It  is  worth  the  consideration  of  life-insurance  com- 
panies and  actuaries  that  the  average  age  of  this  list  at  death  was  68.  This 
also  deserves  the  attention  of  those  who  feel  that  they  have  a special  vocation 
to  harp  upon  the  peculiar  hardships  and  trials  of  this  noblest  of  professions. 

The  Rights,  Powers  and  Duties  of  Members  in  Communion  of  the  Re- 
formed Protestant  Dutch  Church  of  the  City  of  New  York,  is  a pamphlet 
originating  in  some  recent  controversies  between  the  consistory  and  a por- 
tion of  the  membership  of  that  wealthy  ecclesiastical  corporation  known  as 
the  Collegiate  Dutch  or  Reformed  Church  of  the  City  of  New  York.  It 
probably  sets  in  the  strongest  light  the  utmost  privileges  and  powers  which 
•can  be  plausibly  claimed  by  the  membership  of  that  church,  if,  unhappily, 
any  controversy  arise  between  them  and  the  elders. 

The  Report  of  the  Commission  to  devise  a Plan for  the  Government  of  Cities 
in  the  State  of  New  York,  presented  to  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  is  an  exceedingly  able  and  valuable  document  on  one  of  the  most  urgent 
and  difficult  of  the  vexed  questions  of  the  times.  It  is  printed  at  the  Evening 
Post  office.  This  Commission,  consisting  of  twelve  of  the  most  eminent  pub- 
licists of  the  city  of  New  York,  the  Hon.  Wm.  M.  Evarts  chairman, 
was  appointed  by  Governor  Tilden,  under  the  authority  of  the  Legislature 
given  at  his  recommendation.  It  is  well  worthy  of  the  study,  by  its  readers, 
which  it  has  evidently  cost  its  authors.  It  subjects  to  a searching  review  the 
existing  evils  in  the  government  of  cities,  which  are  patent  enough  to  all,  and 
which  chiefly  arise  from  the  fact  that  their  taxation,  expenditures  and 
officers  are  determined  and  allotted  by  those  who  own  not  their  property, 
but  comprise  the  larger  portion  of  their  ignorance  and  vice.  The  Commission 
rightly  judge  that  all  but  one  of  the  remedies  proposed  or  tried  are  at  best 
mere  palliatives,  often  aggravations  of  the  disease.  The  one  remedy  is  to 
restrict  the  right  of  suffrage  in  respect  to  questions  of  municipal  taxation 
and  expenditure  to  the  possessors  of  the  property  taxed,  protected  and 


578 


Contemporary  Literature. 


[July, 


affected  by  the  outlay.  This  judgment  is  all  the  more  weighty  as  emanating 
from  a commission  composed  in  nearly  equal  proportion  of  members  of  both 
the  great  political  parties. 

Two  Addresses  before  the  American  Colonization  Society  at  its  meeting 
in  January,  1877,  one  on  the  Christian  Civilization  of  Africa,  by  the  Hon. 
H.  B.  Latrobe,  the  other  entitled  Patriotism , Philanthropy  and  Relig- 
ion, by  Alexander  T.  McGill,  D.D.,  L.L.D.,  are  contributions  toward 
the  solution  of  the  “color  question”  with  collateral  issues  in  this  country, 
and  the  problem  of  Christianizing  and  civilizing  Africa,  which  will  repay 
careful  perusal. 

The  Carters  issue  Servants  of  Christ,  by  the  author  of  “A  Basket  of  Bar- 
ley Loaves”;  A Hero  in  the  Battle  of  Life  and  other  Brief  Memorials,  by 
the  author  of  “ Memorials  ofCapt.  Hedley  Vickers,”  two  small  and  attractive 
volumes  for  the  young,  and  for  Sunday-school  libraries  ; also,  A Wreath  of 
Indian  Stories,  by  A.  L.  O.  E.,  Honorary  Missionary  at  Amritsar,  author  of 
“ The  Young  Pilgrim,”  “ Rescued  from  Egypt,”  etc.,  etc. 

The  Presbyterian  Board  of  Publication  have  added  the  following  works  to 
their  catalogue:  The  Maiden  Martyr  of  Scotland,  by  Matthew  Mowat 
(an  admirable  little  book  for  the  family  or  the  Sunday-school)  ; The  Pocket 
Hymnal  (a  very  neat  and  convenient  edition)  ; Giving  in  Hard  Times: 
A Word  to  the  People  and  their  Pastors,  by  Rev.  John  Abbott  French, 
published  by  request  of  the  Synod  of  New  Jersey,  which  we  wish  could 
be  read  and  its  lessons  laid  to  heart  by  all  who  complain  of  the  hard  times 
and  make  them  often  an  excuse  for  not  giving,  and  who  by  their  sins,  as 
the  author  boldly  and  justly  charges,  helped  to  bring  these  times  upon 
us.  Alypius  of  Agaste,  by  Mrs.  Webb,  i2mo,  pp.  379.  Pomponiaj  or,  the 
Gospel  in  Ccesar's  Household,  by  the  same  author,  i2mo,  pp.  480.  Mrs. 
Webb  has  fairly  won  a good  reputation  in  the  field  of  religious  fiction.  She 
writes  sensibly,  and  with  an  earnest  purpose.  Her  books  not  only  interest, 
but  tend  to  elevate  the  mind.  The  two  works  before  us  are  similar  in  scope 
and  aim.  The  scene  of  the  first  is  laid  in  Egypt  in  the  fourth  century. 
Agaste  was  the  birthplace  of  the  great  Augustine,  and  he  and  Alypius  were 
companions  in  their  boyhood.  The  scene  of  the  other  is  laid  in  Rome  in 
the  reign  of  the  emperor  Claudius.  Seizing  on  a few  of  the  salient  facts  of 
history  and  making  them  the  basis  of  her  narrative,  Mrs.  Webb  weaves  a 
story  in  each  case  full  of  interest  and  instruction,  not  only  to  the  young,  but 
to  mature  minds. 

Hours  -with  Men  and  Books.  By  Prof.  Wm.  Matthews,  LL.D.  Chica- 
go : S.  C.  Griggs  & Co.  1877.  i2mo,  pp.  384.  The  author  of  this  vol- 
ume has  achieved  remarkable  success.  His  style  is  captivating,  and  he  has 
the  rare  faculty  of  adorning  his  pages  with  apt  and  telling  illustrations. 
His  “ Getting  on  in  the  World,”  and  “The  Great  Conversers,”  made  his 
name  familiar  to  thousands,  and  the  present  volume  will  add  to  the  num- 


1 3 77-] 


Contemporary  LiteraUire. 


579 


ber.  Some  of  the  world’s  great  authors — DeQuincy,  South,  Spurgeon,  and 
Judge  Story — are  passed  in  review  by  him;  and  nearly  a score  of  topics, 
among  which  are  Moral  Grahamism,  The  Illusions  of  History,  The  Morality 
of  Good  Living,  Homilies  on  Early  Rising,  Literary  Triflers,  Writing  for 
the  Press,  A Forgotten  Wit,  Book  Buying,  Working  by  Rule,  and  Too 
Much  Speaking,  are  discussed  with  wit  and  spirit  and  good  sense.  The 
book  is  highly  entertaining,  and  abounds  with  valuable  criticisms.  We 
have  nowhere  seen  so  full  and  satisfactory  a paper  on  Spurgeon — the  ele- 
ments and  secret  of  his  wonderful  power  and  success. 

Chedayne  of  Kotono , a story  of  the  early  days  of  the  Republic.  By 
Ausburn  Towne.  New  York:  Dodd,  Mead  & Co.  i2mo,  pp.  6o6. 
This  is  evidently  the  author’s  maiden  effort,  and  hence  the  critic  must  not  be 
severe.  It  is  to  its  credit  to  be  able  to  say  that  it  does  not  belong  to  the 
sensational  school.  There  is  not  much  plot  in  it,  and  no  sharp  and  discrim- 
inating character-drawing,  and  very  little  philosophy.  Still  it  is  a book 
which  many  will  read  with  interest  and  pronounce  good.  The  most  that 
we  can  say  of  it  is,  that  it  gives  promise  of  better  performance  in  the 
future. 

Fridthjof  s Saga;  a Norse  Romance,  by  Esaias  Tegner,  Bishop  of 
Wexio,  translated  from  the  Swedish  by  Thomas  N.  E.  HOLCOMB  and 
Martha  A.  Lyon  Holcomb.  Chicago  : S.  C.  Griggs  & Co.,  12  mo.,  pp. 
213.  1 877.  This  celebrated  poem — “one  of  the  most  remarkable  pro- 

ductions of  the  age,”  according  to  a high  critical  authority — has  run  through 
numerous  large  editions  in  Sweden,  and  also  in  Norway.  It  has  been  repro- 
duced in  all  European  languages,  even  in  Russian,  Polish,  and  Modern 
Greek.  The  present  translation  is  the  nineteenth  English,  but  the  first 
American  translation.  One  special  feature  of  it,  which  gives  it  interest,  is 
that  every  canto  is  rendered  in  the  same  metre  as  the  Swedish  original, 
and  the  feminine  rhymes  are  everywhere  preserved.  Such  a poem  needs 
no  praise  of  ours,  when  no  less  a poet  than  Longfellow  says  of  it : “ The 
legend  of  Fridthjof,  the  valiant,  is  the  noblest  poetic  contribution  which 
Sweden  has  yet  made  to  the  literary  history  of  the  worid.” 

Miss  Corson's  Cooking  Manual  of  Practical  Directions  for  Economical, 
Every-day  Cookery.  New  York:  Dodd,  Mead  & Co.,  1877.  Miss  Corson 
is  the  Superintendent  of  the  New  York  Cooking  School,  and  this  little  vol- 
ume is  the  fruit  of  her  practical  knowledge  of  the  subject.  It  is  simple, 
concise,  sensible,  and  embodies  in  a brief  compass  just  the  information 
which  every  good  and  economical  housekeeper  needs.  She  admirably  an- 
swers the  question,  How  well  can  we  live  if  we  are  moderately  poor? 

Scribner,  Armstrong  & Co.  publish  Alcohol  as  a Food  and  Medicine. 
A Paper  from  the  Transactions  of  the  International  Medical  Congress  at 
Philadelphia , September , 1876,  by  Ezras  M.  Hunt,  A.M.,  M.D.,  who 
has  achieved  distinction,  not  only  by  his  contributions  to  medical  and  sanitary 


Contemporary  Litcraturc% 


[July,  1877. 


580 

literature,  but  also  in  religious  and  biblical  publications.  This  volume  was 
the  answer  of  the  International  Medical  Congress  to  the  Memorial  of  the 
National  Temperance  Society  asking  for  a deliverance  on  the  subject  of 
which  it  treats.  It  very  ably  contests  the  claims  so  often  made  in  behalf  of 
the  nutritious  and  medicinal  virtues  of  alcohol.  Without  denying  someex- 
treme  cases,  in  which  the  stimulus  of  alcohol  may  spur  the  vital  functions  to 
a needed  exceptional  and  abnormal  activity,  it  conclusively  proves  that  the 
free  and  ordinary  use  of  it  as  a support  or  stimulus  to  flagging  vitality  is  a 
remedy  worse  than  the  disease. 

The  Russo-Turkish  War.  This  little  work,  costing  but  fifteen  cents, 
and  published  by  the  Christiati  Union  Print,  gives  the  information  which 
everybody  needs  just  now  in  reference  to  this  absorbing  subject.  “Who 
Are  the  Turks?  What  is  Russia?  The  Christian  Provinces,  The  Two 
Religions,  How  the  War  Began,  The  Seat  of  War,  Prospects  and 
Probabilities,  are  the  several  points  discilssed.  A map  also  accompanies  the 
work.  We  do  not  see  how  it  were  possible  to  compress  more  important  in- 
formation bearing  on  the  subject  in  the  same  space  than  we  have  here.  No 
intelligent  man  can  afford  to  forego  a thorough  knowledge  of  this  great 
movement,  the  full  significance  and  probable  results  of  which  cannot  well  be 
overestimated,  and  may  essentially  affect  the  political  condition  of  the  old 
world,  and  inaugurate  a new  state  of  things  throughout  the  Eastern  Church. 


* 


.